SUBSIM Radio Room Forums



SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997

Go Back   SUBSIM Radio Room Forums > Modern-Era Subsims > Dangerous Waters
Forget password? Reset here

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-22-06, 09:26 AM   #16
Bill Nichols
Master of Defense
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,502
Downloads: 125
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WargamerScott
Why even invest in SSBNs if they are going to be kept close to home waters? Wouldn't mobile land launchers be more cost effective and easier to hide?
Good point there, that both Russia and China have taken notice of. Russia is fielding the Topol-M mobile ICBM, and China the DF-31 (another mobile ICBM). Interestingly, both Russia and China are also fielding submarine-launched versions of both missiles (Bulava and JL-2, respectively).
__________________
My Dangerous Waters website:
Bill Nichols is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-06, 12:02 PM   #17
OlegM
Engineer
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 214
Downloads: 7
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WargamerScott
Why even invest in SSBNs if they are going to be kept close to home waters? Wouldn't mobile land launchers be more cost effective and easier to hide?
That is a good question that bothered me for some time. Although I could not find a definitive answer this is what I concluded.

First they made lotsa big SSBNs in SSBN frenzy 70s, thinking they'll send them accross the ocean to sit off New York etc., then they realised (mostly thru Walker espionage ring in early 80s, as Bill mentioned) that USN in fact can follow their subs very precisely and kill them at their discretion at minutes' notice, then they did two things:

a) Invested lots of resources into quieting their subs - end result being the Akula H/Ks

b) Devised a system to use their existing SSBNs from relative impunity, ie well defended bastions close to their home ports.

So, keeping subs close to home was invented *after* the subs were already at sea for some time.

Now, why would anyone invest into *further* developing SSBNs *after* all this (as Russians apparently do, with their Juri Dolgoruki class) - is a true mystery to me. It would appear to me that, indeed, SSBNs make no sense anymore. (Not even for the USN, let alone Russians)

O.
OlegM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-06, 01:25 PM   #18
Kapitan
Sub Test Pilot
 
Kapitan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK + Canada
Posts: 7,130
Downloads: 77
Uploads: 7


Default

why dont they keep it to land base.

landbases cant be mobile a submarine can and is also less vunreble to be attacked so thats why they maintain the fleet

curently 15 or 16 SSBN's are in service with russia (due to be cut to 12 when the borey starts in full swing)
__________________
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/
Kapitan is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2025 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.