2008 Election | The Pub | The Field Mess | The Staff College | Bookmark WAB


Go Back   World Affairs Board > Military Forums > Naval Forces
Register FAQ WAB RSS Feed Forum GuidelinesMembers List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Greetings, and welcome to the World Affairs Board!

The World Affairs Board is one of the premier forums for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include foreign & defense policy, international security, military developments, weapons proliferation, terrorism, international strategic affairs, and politics. Our membership includes many from military, defense industry, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today?
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-07-2006, 20:56 PM   #1 (permalink)
Sandman
Military Professional
 
Sandman's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-05-05
Location: Northern Michigan
Posts: 218
Country:
"Cold War Submarines" by Norman Polmar

"Cold War Submarines;
The design and construction of US and Soviet Submarines"

By Norman Polmar and K J Moore.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/157...lance&n=283155

-Polmar has had some really intersting books in the past, including many years editions of "The Ships and Aircraft of the U S Fleet". He is clearly very knowlegable, and has composed many interesting books. After reading his book "Cold War Submarines" I was rather suprised at the conclusion that seems to be drawn from the book in that US subs were not as good as their Soviet counterparts toward the end of the cold war. Weapons in every catagory and some the west never had, non acoustic quieting, speed, dive depth, automation all seem to favor the Soviets. Maintenance, reliability, sonar, personnel tallent and experience were US strengths.
I was mistaken to think the US had such a lead, that is if I should take his conclusion. Any thoughts? Is this the general impression of the two sub fleets?
Sandman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2006, 22:23 PM   #2 (permalink)
TopHatter
Administrator
 
TopHatter's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-03-03
Posts: 9,917
Country:
Send a message via AIM to TopHatter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandman
I was mistaken to think the US had such a lead, that is if I should take his conclusion. Any thoughts? Is this the general impression of the two sub fleets?
My only thought is that I have never been impressed by Norman Polmar in the least.

The "other" Norman (Dr Friedman) is different story entirely.
__________________
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.
~John Quincy Adams
TopHatter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2006, 22:50 PM   #3 (permalink)
TheGreenSmoke
Regular
 
Join Date: 05-16-05
Posts: 114
Country:
I always thought that America had quieter and safer submarines compared to Soviet ones.
TheGreenSmoke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2006, 22:59 PM   #4 (permalink)
TopHatter
Administrator
 
TopHatter's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-03-03
Posts: 9,917
Country:
Send a message via AIM to TopHatter
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnakePlisken
I always thought that America had quieter and safer submarines compared to Soviet ones.
Safer? Unquestionably. Particularly in areas of radiation shielding.
Apparently the Soviets didn't mind if their submarine crews glowed in the dark.
Not unlike the clean-up workers at Chernobyl.

Quieter? Again, definitely. But thanks to the Walker-Whitworth spy ring, the Soviets were informed of how hideously vulnerable their noisey submarines were and they worked to close the gap. Soviet subs like Akula are a good example of lessons learned.
TopHatter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2006, 23:23 PM   #5 (permalink)
Horrido
Staff Emeritus
Chief Subversive
 
Horrido's Avatar
 
Join Date: 08-04-03
Location: Secure, and undisclosed.
Posts: 979
I've heard from a number of sources that Soviet submarine designs were superior performers in the areas of speed, diving depth, and some weapons technologies. Unfortunately, those advantages meant very little when noise and sonar are the deciding factors in submersable warfare, and the west was WAY ahead in those arenas. It's also known that Soviet quality control was attrocious. I toured a Foxtrot diesel submarine commisioned in 1974 with a friend who's a welder. He couldn't wait to get off of it, the welds frightened him to the point he expected it to sink peerside.
__________________
The black flag is raised: Ban them all... Let the Admin sort them out.

I know I'm going to have the last word... I have powers of deletion and lock.
Horrido is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Clinton and Iraq war Major_Armstrong Political Discussions 11 09-26-2008 04:46 AM
Analysis: Chechnya Ironduke The Western Alliance 4 07-28-2008 19:30 PM
Bush, Blair for 'War Crimes' Ray Political Discussions 22 03-04-2007 16:46 PM
Articles and links for the Military Professional Officer of Engineers The Staff College 115 11-20-2006 11:28 AM
Nervous in Baghdad Shek The War in Iraq 0 07-18-2005 10:37 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:23 AM.


Rochen is the business hosting sponsor of World Affairs Board and a provider of reseller web hosting services.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.0.0 RC8