SUBSIM Radio Room Forums



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

Go Back   SUBSIM Radio Room Forums > Current crop of subsims & naval games > COLD WATERS
Forget password? Reset here

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-14-17, 05:06 PM   #76
max-peck
Grey Wolf
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 752
Downloads: 393
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by denis_469 View Post
Excellent. Continue think so and more! When war start our victory would be easy.
I am pretty sure none of us here on this forum are wanting to start a war, or have one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by denis_469 View Post
When I last counted was 30737 attacks. But in was in January this year. Now may be more or less. So find new attacks and find double write and delete doubles. Not only torpedo, but and gun. And other like kingstones and fire.
Now I am very interested Denis

Could you please clarify something

Does this mean 30,000 attacks by Russian Boats on Western Boats?
Does this mean 30,000 attacks by Western Boats on Russian Boats?

Why have I not seen this in the news?

Maybe I am misunderstanding you?
Does this mean 30,000 simulated attacks in a wargame or simulator?

Or do you mean you have data on 30,000 torpedo attacks from history?

I am honestly curious about this Denis, as this is something I do not have any knowledge of
__________________


--------------------------------------------------
Authority should derive from the consent of the governed, not from the threat of force

If the only tool you have is a hammer, pretty soon everything starts to look like a nail

FOTRS Ultimate
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=226270
The future of SH4 - coming to a PC near you soon
max-peck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-17, 02:42 AM   #77
denis_469
Seasoned Skipper
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Russia
Posts: 700
Downloads: 136
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by max-peck View Post
I am pretty sure none of us here on this forum are wanting to start a war, or have one.
You not know history. Every century wild west attack Russia. Now 21 century and wild west not aatck Russia yet. So it must be in future.


Quote:
Originally Posted by max-peck View Post
Now I am very interested Denis

Could you please clarify something

Does this mean 30,000 attacks by Russian Boats on Western Boats?
Does this mean 30,000 attacks by Western Boats on Russian Boats?

Why have I not seen this in the news?

Maybe I am misunderstanding you?
Does this mean 30,000 simulated attacks in a wargame or simulator?

Or do you mean you have data on 30,000 torpedo attacks from history?

I am honestly curious about this Denis, as this is something I do not have any knowledge of
I mean, that it was 30000 attack in history. From start war patrols.

And you all right understand, but start stupid specially. I understand, that wild west not wish poorest himself weaps, so read in this topic for LOL only.
denis_469 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-17, 04:00 AM   #78
The Bandit
Sonar Guy
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 395
Downloads: 39
Uploads: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by denis_469 View Post
You not know history. Every century wild west attack Russia. Now 21 century and wild west not aatck Russia yet. So it must be in future.




I mean, that it was 30000 attack in history. From start war patrols.

And you all right understand, but start stupid specially. I understand, that wild west not wish poorest himself weaps, so read in this topic for LOL only.
For the record
__________________
The Bandit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-17, 12:35 PM   #79
JhonSilver
Watch
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 27
Downloads: 19
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kapitan View Post
Okean 61 and 77 and later on in 84 operation atrina saw the use of "wolf packs"

the western boats could classify each individual boat and also separate them out too so wasn't a massive issue the diesels ...
???

The pack does not go around a bunch. Between submarines is maintained the value of the distance. It's not about what problems with the recognition of the enemy for the american submarine - but the fact that finding a nearby second Soviet submarine extremely complicates the classification - that in battle fatal.
In a radius of 10,000 meters there can not be a second submarine, especially at high noise levels
-------
sorry bad english
JhonSilver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-17, 01:33 PM   #80
shipkiller1
Electrician's Mate
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 136
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JhonSilver View Post
???

but the fact that finding a nearby second Soviet submarine extremely complicates the classification - that in battle fatal.
In a radius of 10,000 meters there can not be a second submarine, especially at high noise levels
-------
sorry bad english
Sorry, no it does not....
shipkiller1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-17, 09:18 PM   #81
Shadriss
A-ganger
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Hooper, UT
Posts: 80
Downloads: 89
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shipkiller1 View Post
Sorry, no it does not....
Agreed, for a great many reasons I can't talk about here.

As for the supposed attack in 2005... riiiiiiight.
__________________
STS1(SS) USN (Ret) : 1997 - 2017
USS MICHIGAN (SSBN-727 BLUE)
USS MONTPELIER (SSN-765)
IMF PACNORWEST
USS ALASKA (SSBN-732 GOLD)
USS ALABAMA (SSBN-731 GOLD)
NAVAL OCEAN PROCESSING FACILITY, WHIDBEY ISLAND
USS TENNESSEE (SSBN-734 GOLD)
Shadriss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-17, 03:01 AM   #82
JhonSilver
Watch
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 27
Downloads: 19
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadriss View Post
Agreed, for a great many reasons I can't talk about here.
So many disadvantages:

1. The submarines do not exchange target designation underwater - two boats do not have the advantage of finding an enemy over one

2. The presence of a nearby allied submarine for both imposes restrictions on the use of weapons, while for the enemy increases the probability of hitting

3. Each new underwater contact in wartime is the default enemy. Thus, with a temporary loss of contact with the ally, there is a risk of identification error.

4. The number of targets that can hit one submarine is sufficient to destroy any surface target, the presence of a second submarine for an attack of the same purpose will not increase the effectiveness.
(This does not concern the attack of the CVBG)

5. Boats located at one point can be bypassed, including dispersing the group target. Boats distributed in the veil are much more difficult to get around.
-----------------
Any advantages?
-----------------
Benefits are when accompanied SSBN. But to attack convoy ??
JhonSilver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-17, 06:27 AM   #83
shipkiller1
Electrician's Mate
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 136
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JhonSilver View Post
So many disadvantages:

1. The submarines do not exchange target designation underwater - two boats do not have the advantage of finding an enemy over one

2. The presence of a nearby allied submarine for both imposes restrictions on the use of weapons, while for the enemy increases the probability of hitting

3. Each new underwater contact in wartime is the default enemy. Thus, with a temporary loss of contact with the ally, there is a risk of identification error.

4. The number of targets that can hit one submarine is sufficient to destroy any surface target, the presence of a second submarine for an attack of the same purpose will not increase the effectiveness.
(This does not concern the attack of the CVBG)

5. Boats located at one point can be bypassed, including dispersing the group target. Boats distributed in the veil are much more difficult to get around.
-----------------
Any advantages?
-----------------
Benefits are when accompanied SSBN. But to attack convoy ??
This is not a criticism, but I am not sure what you are trying to say here.
shipkiller1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-17, 07:46 AM   #84
JhonSilver
Watch
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 27
Downloads: 19
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shipkiller1 View Post
... I am not sure what you are trying to say here.
Is Google translator so bad?
JhonSilver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-17, 08:22 AM   #85
Kapitan
Sub Test Pilot
 
Kapitan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK + Canada
Posts: 7,112
Downloads: 69
Uploads: 7


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JhonSilver View Post
???

The pack does not go around a bunch. Between submarines is maintained the value of the distance. It's not about what problems with the recognition of the enemy for the american submarine - but the fact that finding a nearby second Soviet submarine extremely complicates the classification - that in battle fatal.
In a radius of 10,000 meters there can not be a second submarine, especially at high noise levels
-------
sorry bad english


There is a lot of evidence from past Soviet war games that diesels would hunt together in a group normally of 3 to 5 submarines, the exercises i mentioned were the known occasions for large scale deployment in such a configuration spacing would be around 5 miles to 10 miles apart close enough for mutual assistance far enough not to get under each others way.

Sonar both west and east is advanced enough to be able to single out specific targets even when bunched together close, the fact a submarine can hide in the cavitation of another ships screw and still monitor a potential target is testament to the system in hand, Type 2070 of the Royal Navy has the ability to listen and classify over 100 targets simultaneously with a range of 1000 miles (official release) (yes just think on that )


Now Denis 1st off any attack Russian to American or vice versa which leads to the loss of an asset if a formal declaration of war under international law (re pearl harbour)

2nd the MK48 and Stingray torpedoes are not designed to hit the hull they are designed to go beneath it and create a gas bubble which effectively breaks the vessels spine.
HMAS Farncombe which in 1999 sank the Frigate HMAS Torrens during a sinkex demonstrates my point in case your wondering it is also the load up screen of sub command but here is the link to show you that is goes underneath the hull.



In case you want an explanation this video is from the Royal Australian Navy giving you a description and a Video of a 2004 Sinkex where HMAS Farncombe sinks the USNS Kilauea.




The notion of 30,000 attacks in history is non-sensicle given the Russian fleet in its entirely hasn't had more than 2,500 boats. what do you count as an attack?

Further more i was speaking with Igor Kurdin (Former Captain of a Delta IV) yesterday he confirmed that the standing orders for Russian boats are the same as the American or British which i will tell you is Fire if Fired upon, i can assure you had a western boat launched any weapon aimed at any Russian boat then it is certain the Russian boat will fire back.

In 1962 independent authority was given to commanders Igor Savitsky, Nikolai Shumkov, Ryurik Ketov, and Alexi Dubivko to fire without permission from Moscow nuclear tipped torpedoes if they were threatened by the USA thank god no one lost their cool because on the Foxtrot class B-59 (under the command of Ryurik Ketov) the boat had been forced to surface Vasili Arkipov (who technically out ranked the Captain but was 2nd in command) refused to agree to the order to fire the weapon (it required a unanimous decision between Captain 2nd in command and Political officer) Thus preventing the USS Blandy under the command of Charles Rosier) from being incinerated.

Technically speaking The USA committed a war crime it was only wording that saved it, the crime being blockading a country they were not at war with which is against international laws, what saved the USA was Robert McNamara advising Kennedy not to use the word "blockade" but use the word "Quarantine" instead.



I'm sorry but i cannot believe or Justify your 30000 claim or the 2005 attack no boat has been unaccounted for in 2005.

As for Data links they do exist and you can contact submarines while underwater both Russian and Western, i don't think i can go much further with this without treading on some toes here.

And finally as for the 30,000 claim i am struggling to find 3 credible losses due to foul play, and i have been through the books only real suspicious one would be the K129 Golf class that went down in the pacific ocean and was later part of Azorian and Project Jennifer.
__________________
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
Old 07-16-17, 09:13 AM   #86
shipkiller1
Electrician's Mate
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 136
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 0


Default

The Aussy officer was only partially correct.

What the torpedo does is....

When the warhead detonates, it creates the first pressure wave. You see this in the first video as the puff of smoke out of the stack...

Now the expanding pressure wave leaves a vacuum bubble. Once the pressure wave expands to a point where sea pressure overcomes the pressure of the bubble, the water attempts to fill the vacuum, violently. When this happens (this is hard to explain) the in-rushing water that is coming in from all sides since the vacuum bubble is a sphere, has so much energy, it sort of passes through itself (this is what is hard to visualize), releasing more energy.... This second pressure wave is amplified and produces the more energetic second explosion you see, breaking the keel.
shipkiller1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-17, 09:25 AM   #87
PL_Harpoon
Engineer
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 210
Downloads: 21
Uploads: 4


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shipkiller1 View Post
The Aussy officer was only partially correct.

What the torpedo does is....

When the warhead detonates, it creates the first pressure wave. You see this in the first video as the puff of smoke out of the stack...

Now the expanding pressure wave leaves a vacuum bubble. Once the pressure wave expands to a point where sea pressure overcomes the pressure of the bubble, the water attempts to fill the vacuum, violently. When this happens (this is hard to explain) the in-rushing water that is coming in from all sides since the vacuum bubble is a sphere, has so much energy, it sort of passes through itself (this is what is hard to visualize), releasing more energy.... This second pressure wave is amplified and produces the more energetic second explosion you see, breaking the keel.

Actually, unless I'm wrong you can see all this in this video:



and then from the surface at 4:44 where you can clearly see both waves.
PL_Harpoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-17, 01:19 PM   #88
JhonSilver
Watch
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 27
Downloads: 19
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kapitan View Post
...from past Soviet war games that diesels would hunt together in a group normally of 3 to 5 submarines,....spacing would be around 5 miles to 10 miles apart
Oh Thank you very much!
Those. Tactics of group action was used by diesel boats (a legacy of the World War 2)
- obviously unjustified for nuclear submarines.

So left it in 1968 campain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kapitan View Post
a submarine can hide in the cavitation of another ships screw and still monitor a potential target

the ability to listen and classify over 100 targets simultaneously
This applies to surface ships.

----------------------------
----------------------------

It is likely that the torpedo Uset-80 is overpowered. By 1984, problems with homing in difficult conditions had not been solved on it.

And Set-65 have differents homing systems in 1968 and 1984.
JhonSilver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-17, 02:26 PM   #89
Kapitan
Sub Test Pilot
 
Kapitan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK + Canada
Posts: 7,112
Downloads: 69
Uploads: 7


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JhonSilver View Post
Oh Thank you very much!
Those. Tactics of group action was used by diesel boats (a legacy of the World War 2)
- obviously unjustified for nuclear submarines.

So left it in 1968 campain.


This applies to surface ships.

----------------------------
----------------------------

It is likely that the torpedo Uset-80 is overpowered. By 1984, problems with homing in difficult conditions had not been solved on it.

And Set-65 have differents homing systems in 1968 and 1984.
These tactics were still being used in 84 with atrina and okean 86 so not still 68 im afraid, in fact the stance was still used in 2000 in baltic exercises.

as for cavitation yes they can however modern sensors can now tell the difference.
__________________
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
Old 07-18-17, 12:00 PM   #90
ikalugin
Ocean Warrior
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 3,212
Downloads: 8
Uploads: 0


Default

Heh, missed this thread. My 50 cents would be that it appears that our estimed US comrades do not understand the logic of the Soviet submarine development.

Not only is the effect of spy rings over estimated, the driving requirements behind the developments are poorly understood, for example why and when did Soviets switch to rafting? Why Alfas were small, fast SSNs? Why didn't Soviets deploy more weapons on SSBNs? etc.
__________________
Grumpy as always.
ikalugin 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 06:13 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2024 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.