Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Which is best non-AIP diesel submarine in world??

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    In fact, IMOE the one thing that is common about submariners and specwarries is that they STFU about capability;)
    Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

    Comment


    • #32
      RE: Reload this Page Which is best non-AIP diesel submarine in world??

      One thing to keep in mind when comparing SSK/AIP (SSI) are the ROE's of the exercise. The SSN normally is the one that has to enter the area while the SSI is already there. The typical situation is that the SSN enters the area at a high speed then slows down to patrol. Unfortunately, this gives the SSI the advantage of being able to know when and where the SSN is. Must the SSN always use its coolant pumps? That could be a condition of the ROE's.
      Remember, the 688I's below (I think) 8kts can run without using coolant pumps so, it is very silent. The USS Seawolf and Virginia can run at 20kts without needing coolant pumps! Plus they ALL are trying to catch up the USS Ohio Class boomers in lower noise levels. Boomers are a class of sub that no country really talks about but, the importance of their mission means their countries are willing to spend all sorts of money to keep them "state of the art."
      Also one thing to keep in mind when judging SSI's, what is the age of the designs?

      Comment


      • #33
        For those who are on the distrib list. This months NSL has a tidy article on a USN submariners exchange with RAN
        Linkeden:
        http://au.linkedin.com/pub/gary-fairlie/1/28a/2a2
        http://cofda.wordpress.com/

        Comment


        • #34
          RE: Reload this Page Which is best non-AIP diesel submarine in world??

          Fgf0012-aust, for those of us who are not subscribers, what is the gist of the article please? -Adrian

          Comment


          • #35
            How about the upholder class, Type 2,400 (Thats its displacement).

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Chaobam Armour View Post
              How about the upholder class, Type 2,400 (Thats its displacement).
              I believe I've commented before - but briefly.

              In 1999 at the Defence Procurement Conf, the then Chief of Navy in front of 400+ delegates responded to a "cleared" journalist who asked the same question:

              in short:

              no - the boats were seen even then as more problematic than persevering with Collins. We considered the upholders as a second squadron, 1st as an interim while Collins was sorted, and then as a second squadron when Collins was cleared.

              Much of the conf details are restricted, but we ended up with about 15 minutes of detail on known problems with the Class

              Nice boats if they'd been attended to by their former owners, but they were handcuffed by a lack of commitment by UKGovt and a decision to save money by going to an all nuke fleet.

              If you have a military address I'm happy to discuss some of it further if you PM me with it. I'll respond from mine for obvious reasons. But I'm on leave and won't be back on the job for another week. :)
              Linkeden:
              http://au.linkedin.com/pub/gary-fairlie/1/28a/2a2
              http://cofda.wordpress.com/

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by avon1944 View Post
                Fgf0012-aust, for those of us who are not subscribers, what is the gist of the article please? -Adrian
                Am currently on Leave and at home so don't have it with me.

                basically it was an article by a USN exchange officer who had just done a 2 year rotation with RAN as an acoustic warfare officer, and a compressed history of how he did his Perisher training on Collins. There are over 12 USN sailors attached to the Sub squadron and all are doing diesel qualification at the acoustic warfare level. IIRC (not in the article) we have 6 fulltime serving USN staff on the boats, another 6 are doing desk jobs.

                RAN Dolphins are apparently "keepsakes". :)
                Linkeden:
                http://au.linkedin.com/pub/gary-fairlie/1/28a/2a2
                http://cofda.wordpress.com/

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Rodinga View Post
                  The Collins class according to an ASC financial report also have facilities for the insertion of special forces squads

                  also the subs have been upgraded with the AN/BYG-1 Combat Control System with mark 48 ADCAP Torpedos which are a match for US AIP subs
                  supplementary to prev:

                  small issues here that are a bit incorrect.

                  The specwarries have always been catered for on RAN subs - even the Oberons. On the Collins they also have the untilised space that was allocated for the AIP (which was never purchased as the trial units didn't show any great advantage. AIP for Collins provided minimal benefit.) The AIP test engines are sitting in the shed.

                  They've always had Mk-48's, the CBASS is designed to kill subs in the littorals and was co-developed with the USN using the tech and datasets that both navies have gathered over time.

                  Lastly, the US only have nukes, they don't have conventionals, and thus zero chance for AIP subs. The only conventional they had that was struck off years ago was non AIP anyway.
                  Last edited by gf0012-aust; 11 Jan 09,, 09:22.
                  Linkeden:
                  http://au.linkedin.com/pub/gary-fairlie/1/28a/2a2
                  http://cofda.wordpress.com/

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Baaper View Post
                    Special on the Dutch ships are the X-rudders. Most countries have + rudders. X rudders are significantly more difficult to build, but better capable of dealing with damage. There are less rudders needed to maintain steering capability.
                    It is however meaningless when taken out of context. eg Collins uses a st george configuration but also has a significant difference compared to other st george cross configured subs - ie it's FBW and uses less crew to drive due to a systems config change. A "car"' is not always a "car" just because they're both fitted with multiple doors and can go from "a to b"

                    Originally posted by Baaper View Post
                    Diving depths are not right btw. The real depths are usually classified.
                    The real depths are always classified. The USN still doesn't release absolute sub performance parameters from it's first generation nukes.

                    The only data that is useful are the external empirical measurements. All combat related specs are vague enough to seem sensiible but don't reflect actual capability by any margin (and thats for all the subs)
                    Linkeden:
                    http://au.linkedin.com/pub/gary-fairlie/1/28a/2a2
                    http://cofda.wordpress.com/

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by gunnut View Post
                      Can these SSKs do the same type of job that the old ocean going subs like Gatos and U-boats did in WW2? For example spending weeks on patrol on the open ocean.
                      eg the original requirements for Collins were to be able to run blue and gold crews (now we can't even get half manned up!) In their case they were always designed as long range blue water and had to surpass the perforrmance specs of the Oberons. If you consider the fact that RAN Oberons used to deploy right up the top of the northern east coast of the old soviet union, then autonomy had to be as good at a minimum. They can and have deployed on the same mission cycles as US nukes.
                      Linkeden:
                      http://au.linkedin.com/pub/gary-fairlie/1/28a/2a2
                      http://cofda.wordpress.com/

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Rodinga View Post
                        A recent innovation by Australian Submarine Corporation in maintenance allows the diesel engine to undergo maintenance inside the Collins class submarine which is an improvement over having to cut the hull open to do so.
                        Not entirely true. All marine diesels are designed to be worked on at sea. If its busted then you don't have the luxury of ringing up your local sub tender (maritime road side service) for spare parts. :). If you want to see how easy it is, then a cursory look at an MTU or Guascor (spanish) maritime diesel engine will show you how big and frequent those inspection and service plates are. Guascor have some impressive (real) availability rates.

                        The difference in Collins was not that repairs could be done at sea (as all submarine diesels have that ability), it was that the build requirements selected an engine that was not expected and used in a complex military naval veessel. ASC had nothing to do with that process.
                        Last edited by gf0012-aust; 11 Jan 09,, 09:32.
                        Linkeden:
                        http://au.linkedin.com/pub/gary-fairlie/1/28a/2a2
                        http://cofda.wordpress.com/

                        Comment


                        • #43
                          non-AIP ?

                          Sorry,I didnt notice the title

                          Comment


                          • #44
                            Originally posted by Tomluter View Post
                            but I think you should put China's "Yuan" sub to your list.
                            Why? A submarine without arrays is about as useful as a car without headlights driving at night in an unlit street.

                            again, AIP is important in context. It's not some panacea for conventionals that lifts them into a capability league automatically.

                            No offence, but photos are meaningless when looking at capability. Some of the critical elements never see a lens.
                            Last edited by gf0012-aust; 11 Jan 09,, 21:13.
                            Linkeden:
                            http://au.linkedin.com/pub/gary-fairlie/1/28a/2a2
                            http://cofda.wordpress.com/

                            Comment


                            • #45
                              Originally posted by gf0012-aust View Post
                              Why? A submarine without arrays is about as useful as a car without headlights driving at night in an unlit street.

                              again, AIP is important in context. It's not some panacea for conventionals that lifts them into a capability league automatically.

                              No offence, but photos are meaningless when looking at capability. Some of the critical elements never see a lens.
                              You've never going driving with night vision goggles? Its kinda fun to do it on rural roads with the lights off and coming up behind people then flipping on your lights, have heard of people playing chicken as well but never done that myself.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X