rickusn

is the title of an article by AD Baker III(Former Editor of Combat Fleets) in the USNI's June Proceedings magazine.

Another issue chock full of good stuff.

Including an article discussing the relative merits of nuclear vs non-nuclear submarines.

An article discussing Russian Navy and USN cooperation and an artticle by Norman Friedman which tie in nicely with my ongoing series of posts illuminating ongoing USN and International copperation exercises.

Some articles are available free online.

Proceedings Magazine - U.S. Naval Institute

His data is as of May 1, 2007. He uses data "derived from official and authoritative unofficial sources" and includes only operational submarines ie not submarine undergoing trials or existing but long-erm laid-up vessels.

While he lists ballistic-missile, midget , very small coastal and auxilary submarines for the purposes of this post I will ignore them.

As I will the USNs SSGNs that are converted SSBNs.

Thirty-Six nations operate 353 SSN/SSGN/SS(K)(I).

Twelve nations operate 1-3 units:

Algeria, Argentina, Bulgaria, Canada, Colombia, Ecuador, Indonesia, Iran, portugal, S. Africa, Taiwan & Venuesuela

All non-nuclear powered.

Thirteen nations operate 4-6 units:

Austrailia, Brazil, Chile, France, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Pakistan, Peru, Poland, Singapore, Spain & Sweden

France operates 6 SSNs otherwise all the rest are non-nuclear powered.

These 25 nations operate 99 submarines.

The next tier is 8-9 units:

Greece
S. Korea
United Kingdom

All nine of the UKs vessels are nuclear-powered the other nations non-nuclear.

In the 12 -20 category we have:

Germany
India
Japan
N. Korea
Turkey

All are non-nuclear powered submarines.

These eight nations combined total is 102 units.

The last three nations operate 152 attack submarines.:

China: 58 all but three non-nuclear-powered.

Russia: 41 almost evenly divided between nuclear(22) and non-nuclear(19) powered. Russia operates the only "true" SSGNs of which nine are operational along with 13 SSN.

USN: 53 all nuclear powered.

Grand Total for all 36 navies is 353.

Again these numbers dont include those submarines on order, building, on-trials, reactivating or in long-term reserve along with the other categories omitted that were outlined at the top.

Or those that officially became operational post 1May2007.

Questions welcome.

FiRepower

The numbers of US , Russia and UK submarines are false

Stan

the uk has 13 subs all nuclear powered
4 vangaurd
7 trafalgar
2 swiftsure

rickusn

Firepower:

You are full of crap. Put up or shut up.

The only thing false is your post.

Stan:

Which part of this did you not read:

"While he lists ballistic-missile, midget , very small coastal and auxilary submarines for the purposes of this post I will ignore them."

This is why I seldom come to this forum and now will come less.

The total ignorance and arrogance professed by poeple like Stan and firepower is mind-numbing.

Complete and utter no nothings.

Parihaka

Rick, we can't ban people like Firepower just because they might be idiots, they have to prove to us that they are idiots. I'm sorry your posts and links get cluttered up with the odd bit of crap, but we, the senior members do appreciate them, if nothing else as a fantastic reference library.
While I'm on the subject, do you have or can you point me in the direction of information on Littoral Combat Ships? Somebody asked about their suitability for the RNZN and I wouldn't have the faintest idea.

__________________
In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz

Parihaka

FiRepower, having reviewed your posts, I see that you've had two thread-locks already and you are indeed an idiot.
One warning and one only:
stay away from the serious military topics.

gunnut

If I were you, I would seek the most up-to-date figures, backed up by easily reviewed documents made public by the military and the government, before saying Rick posted faulty info.

He knows his stuff. You can pretty much take his figures to the bank.

__________________
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

Shamus

__________________
A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but
it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.

dave lukins

Rick, you have over 1000 posts and are classed as a Professional. Don't let a couple of post get you to a stage where we all loose you. All the REAL Professionals Guys will be upset Let the Praying Mantis ooops I mean Pari sort "things"out Count to ten....1..2..

Shamus

Shamus

Even Dave will miss you Rick .

dave lukins

Retribution will surely follow..now where is Uncle "Don" Corliona's telephone Number?

Feanor

The numbers of Russian subs are highly questionable. On paper the Russian Navy may operate 41 but in reality I would be willing to bet that about half of them are not combat capable due to poor maintenance, lack of funding, etc.

Dectilion

well, i think FiRepower humiliation has been thorough enough. Interesting list Rickusn, i never realized Germany had quite that many(building the next u-boat waves for WWIII?) And as a heads up, if you post this list next week the only change should be the sale of all British subs to india(even Trident subs, cause apparently the Scottish parliament voted against renewal)

rickusn

First off: Thanks to those who posted such kind words.

Second: The #s were not mine but AD Bakers III, as I stated up front, and who is an highly esteemed, informed and knowledgeable naval analyst, from his article.

But I found little to quibble over and nothing that I can say for proof positive is in error.

Third: Feanor if you have better info please post it.

Plus you too seem to have not read the original post either.:

"His data is as of May 1, 2007. He uses data "derived from official and authoritative unofficial sources" and includes only operational submarines ie not submarines undergoing trials or existing but long-term laid-up vessels."

Indeed Russian and Chinese #s can be difficult to verify but Mr. Bakers counting certainly is not "false" or even "questionable" by any reasonable, objective standard or measure.

If you choose to "question" someones veracity or data you must bring your own data and documentation to back it up or you have no credibility.

Russia has spent much time, effort and relative funding on submarines in general and in particular on rejuvenating its SSK force along with its SSBN force(Which type I chose not to discuss in my original post.).

I look forward to reading the documentation you provide detailing the situation and names/hull #s of the, "...about half of them are not combat capable..", RFS units.

Thanks in advance.

Fourthly:

On the USN #s which of course are the easiest to verify.:

Ship Battle Forces

Nuclear Attack Submarines Class No. of Hulls
SSN 21 3
SSN 688 47
SSN 774 3

Total 53

Nothing "false" there.

Fifth:

Dectilion:

Most of the German submarines (10) are now closer to 35 years old than 30 and plans were for a slow but steady removal from service of those vessels beginning in 2006 apparently this has been delayed or postponed.

The other four are quite new with another two either on order or building. I forget off the top of my head if construction has already commenced.

Its quite likely all the older vessels will be decommissioned by the time they are commissioned 2012-2013.

Could you post a news link on the "vote against renewal"?

Thanks.

Sixth:

I planned on doing a post discussing SSN/SS(K)(I) ongoing/future construction and plans.

But....

However for starters Venezuela and S. Korea are at the forefront of recent news reports in this area.