New Virginia SSNs

[geetrue]

Originally Posted by Linton

Geetrue,I think an ekranoplan would have been a better bet than a seaplane.

What was that? Is a ekranoplan like the Russian sea dragon that got 10' off the water?

I also thought of perhaps an LSD with two little nasty stingray diiesel submarines wandering the oceans of the world, ready to release their precious cargo in time of conflict.

Originally Posted by fatty

It's difficult for us to imagine how to make these things cheaper. There aren't many details available about what kind of gadgets go into building modern submarines, so it's hard to say "oh, xyz system is kind of superfluous, let's nix that and save $10 million." .

What about smaller submarines with half the crew and change crews like the FBM submarines use to do and still do that is.

This is where we could have more superority than the Russians ... in the men themselves, although I have never met a Russian salior ... I would like to someday.

[Kapitan]

Spare parts can be put any where alot of parts for russian subs go in the sail the big bits anyway, its O rings galore on some boats and everywhere you turn theres some part for some thing some where not to mention food cramed in every nook and cranny.

[ASWnut101]

Originally Posted by Kapitan

Thats just an example but dont ask about american submarines not that up to date with them at all infact theres one heck of alot i dont know about them.

So they could be right, and you wouldn't know?...

But i will say this though.

Even if they lack the speed and diving depths of the russians they are still far superior boats and i personaly think that the odds of a russian sinking an american would be around 3 to 1.

Huh? you say the American's are better but then you said that the odds of a Russian sinking one of us is 3-1? I don't understand.

[Kapitan]

No what i said was 3 russians to take 1 american hence the odds being 3 to 1

Also i can say with 99.9% they are not correct only the people who work on them build them know thier true capibilitys afterall its not good to broadcast to your opponants true things.

[fatty]

Originally Posted by geetrue

What was that? Is a ekranoplan like the Russian sea dragon that got 10' off the water?

The Caspian Sea Monster, yep!

Originally Posted by geetrue

What about smaller submarines with half the crew and change crews like the FBM submarines use to do and still do that is.

Yes, something like this would work too. My concern would be how small we could go before compromising effectiveness. The talk of externally mounted weapons sounds fun, it would free up space occupied by VLS tubes.

Originally Posted by geetrue

This is where we could have more superority than the Russians ... in the men themselves

And IMHO where the U.S. has always been superior to the Russians; man for man, professional forces perform better than conscripted ones.

[ASWnut101]

Oh, guess the poor grammar got to me. Sorry.



And if they are not correct, how do you know the Russian ship's capeabilities, might I ask?

[geetrue]

Originally Posted by ASWnut101

Oh, guess the poor grammar got to me. Sorry.



And if they are not correct, how do you know the Russian ship's capeabilities, might I ask?

Somebody knew who told somebody else, who told somebody else, who told Jane's Fightiing Ships, who told us on a need to know secret level ... not top secret, but need to know level ... sonar had that level.

You would be surprised what intelligence gathers can do in a bar for example or with the right looking gal ... where do you think all those spy story writers got their best material? This is has been going on for quite sometime you know.

I can tell you one thing (I wasn't there though) there are pictures of Russian ships taken under water of their props to see how many blades they're were and some of the ships were underway ...

Oh, I see you were talking to Kapitan ... I talk too much anyway. Yes, Kapitan how you know so much, spill the beans ...

P.S. We had so much food we walked on top of the cases of canned food on the USS Salmon.

[ASWnut101]

Originally Posted by geetrue

P.S. We had so much food we walked on top of the cases of canned food on the USS Salmon.

:rotfl: You've already said that soooo many times!!

[moose1am]

This sounds like the guys in the Navy before Pearl Harbor who said that the Battle Ships were supreme.

If you wait for a war to find out that your weapons are not as good as your opponents it's too lake .

AIP subs are proving their superiority in the recent Tests performed with the sub load to the US Navy for testing.

A combination of Nuclear and AIP propultion would be the ideal thing. Long range and super quiet go well together. The German's use this during WWII to great effect for a while. Long range diesel engines and super quiet electric propultion. Now add to that super quiet electric propultion the ablity to go for days instead of hours and you have a winner in todays ocean environement.



Wonderful, but AIPs still do not meet the requirements for global force projection. Until the technology develops fully, you won't see AIPs in the service of the USN. Even a simplified view of USN history tells you that the navy has never produced two competitive forms of propulsion at the same time. The so-called 'submarine mafia' has seen to that.

Regarding comparison with the F22: I know. I made that comparison several posts ago.[/QUOTE]

[Bort]

I favor a mix of Virgina Class and AIP submarines. The AIP subs will allow the Navy to bring its submarine force levels back to an acceptable number without breaking the bank, as well as providing a submarine that may well be more useful in shallow littoral areas. AIP submarines could relieve alot of personnel issues that the Nuclear Submarine force has, specifically in recruiting and retaining Nuclear trained officers and enlisted men. I would be more than willing to accept the loss of some surface combatants, particularly the Perry class frigates of questionable utility that have had their missile systems removed, in order to pay for mixed propulsion attack submarine force level of at least 70 submarines. When it comes to naval warfare, submarines are far more useful than surface ships in eliminating enemy vessels and as a whole give more bang for the buck. Why not?

Also, the nuclear submariners "union" should stop viewing diesel boats as a threat that cannot be alowed in any form in the Navy. With ever rising costs and skeptical politicians, Diesels may be the only way to save the Submarine force from future irrelevance.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Originally Posted by fatty

And IMHO where the U.S. has always been superior to the Russians; man for man, professional forces perform better than conscripted ones.

Well, while I'm sure that the US Navy's average submariner proficiency is superior to the Russian (unless there's something badly wrong with my worldview), but this explanation is not valid for the submarine force, where the Russians are something like 70-80% professional (michmen and officers) in the newer boats.

It's difficult for us to imagine how to make these things cheaper. There aren't many details available about what kind of gadgets go into building modern submarines, so it's hard to say "oh, xyz system is kind of superfluous, let's nix that and save $10 million."

The important thing IMO is STRICT budget control. Congress is soft, and so American equipment keep overrunning their planned cost (by over a hundred percent). Congress concedes, the project overruns the new budget. Congress concedes...

What is really needed is a hard line system - the Navy wants something, they make a budget. They can include a REASONABLE safety margin (20%, not 200%) to account for inflation and a few accidents. If approved, exactly that many dollars are allocated.

Even if the sub is as complete as many of the nearly complete Soviet products that got choked off by the end of the Cold War, it is frozen when the money falls to zero. No extra infusions of money. Just take the hulk and scrap it, so as to remove the temptation.

If the US were Russia, I'd have suggested firing the Chief Designer and the admirals involved, but this is an American scenario so I can't do that.

More likely, if they budget the way they do now, the sub would barely have started the lay-down process when the money runs out. The Navy can take the plans home, then.

This will:
1) Force the Navy to make realistic budgets. At least then Congress and the American people will know the true cost up front. This eliminates ploys on giving the cost in "instalments" so people feel like spitting out the money just to complete it.
2) Force the Navy to take a hard line on economizing every stage of the production, taking real efficiency measures ... etc.

Then America might just have reasonably priced subs.

[geetrue]

Originally Posted by Kazuaki Shimazaki II

Well, while I'm sure that the US Navy's average submariner proficiency is superior to the Russian (unless there's something badly wrong with my worldview), but this explanation is not valid for the submarine force, where the Russians are something like 70-80% professional (michmen and officers) in the newer boats.

Whooe! What do they call you for a short name ... Kazuaki Shimazaki II?

[fatty]

...where the Russians are something like 70-80% professional...

Which is still not 100%. In a "newer boat" like the Project 677, which according to Haze Gray has a crew of 37, you'd have 8-11 men who really don't want to be there.

On a side note, I am impressed by the Russian boats' low crew compliment. Akula-IIs appear to have a third of the crew that a 688 does! What kind of automation is at work there? :hmm:

Then America might just have reasonably priced subs.

Great idea. I am not sure about the U.S., but here in Canada we have companies that submit bids and compete for projects whenever there's a ship to be overhauled or built. Is it the same in the U.S.? If so, how do you think implementing a strict budget would affect these competitions?

[moose1am]

Ask not what your goverment can do for you, ask what you can do for your goverment!

Originally Posted by Bort

I favor a mix of Virgina Class and AIP submarines. The AIP subs will allow the Navy to bring its submarine force levels back to an acceptable number without breaking the bank, as well as providing a submarine that may well be more useful in shallow littoral areas. AIP submarines could relieve alot of personnel issues that the Nuclear Submarine force has, specifically in recruiting and retaining Nuclear trained officers and enlisted men. I would be more than willing to accept the loss of some surface combatants, particularly the Perry class frigates of questionable utility that have had their missile systems removed, in order to pay for mixed propulsion attack submarine force level of at least 70 submarines. When it comes to naval warfare, submarines are far more useful than surface ships in eliminating enemy vessels and as a whole give more bang for the buck. Why not?

Also, the nuclear submariners "union" should stop viewing diesel boats as a threat that cannot be alowed in any form in the Navy. With ever rising costs and skeptical politicians, Diesels may be the only way to save the Submarine force from future irrelevance.

[Kapitan]

Originally Posted by fatty

Which is still not 100%. In a "newer boat" like the Project 677, which according to Haze Gray has a crew of 37, you'd have 8-11 men who really don't want to be there.

On a side note, I am impressed by the Russian boats' low crew compliment. Akula-IIs appear to have a third of the crew that a 688 does! What kind of automation is at work there? :hmm:

Great idea. I am not sure about the U.S., but here in Canada we have companies that submit bids and compete for projects whenever there's a ship to be overhauled or built. Is it the same in the U.S.? If so, how do you think implementing a strict budget would affect these competitions?

Well the russian subs for starters rely heavily on alot of automation however its well known western submarines are always over crewed ie they have 7 blokes doing the job 3 can do.

Automation only realy came to light in 1969 with the al'fa that was the first true russian automated monster, alot of its gadgets were fully automated.

Please dont knock the russian systems simply beceause if they had the american sonar screens then they would have the advantage and also filtering systems.

The range of the russian sonar systems on the akula I improved and akula II acctualy exceade in detection range compaired to the 688i, but the disadvantage comes with the screen the information is displayed on which cuts its detection range by about 1/3.

The issue has been addressed now and gepard and vepr both have waterfall display systems on board, there are plans in the works to refit the systems on the improved akulas also the newer SSBN's and SSGN'S and new builds the project 677 has a water fall display also.

i dont know how effective the display system is but i dont think its quite to the level of the american system yet.