Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 64

Thread: Project 885 Yasen vs. NSSN Virginia

  1. #46
    New Member
    Join Date
    27 Jun 06
    Posts
    9
    I wouldn't really believe it. The US has always had a technological advantage in submarine technology over their Russian/Soviet counterparts. In fact, Russia is a decade behind US submarine technology.

    The Russian attempts to field advance, ultra-quiet submarines is evident in the many mishaps that occurred during the Soviet era.

  2. #47
    Senior Contributor Archer's Avatar
    Join Date
    13 Oct 03
    Posts
    1,100
    Quote Originally Posted by dalem
    I'm mocking the lethality and utility of mounting them on MBTs and ruining the already bad guns of same.

    -dale
    This appears to be flawed ..

    Unless theres evidence to suggest that firing slow ATGMs from gun tubes spoils them...at least the latest Russian M series 2A46 guns have decent wear & tear figures (in terms of rounds), use modern manufacturing & metallurgy- so nor are they bad guns.

    And FSAPDS rounds routinely fire at higher pressures/ temps- what difference does a slower, HEAT round with a booster, and that too some 6-8/ per tank make? In practise shoots given the cost, these are bound to be even rarer and sims are used...again neglible wear & tear..
    Karmani Vyapurutham Dhanuhu

    My bow is stretched for its task

  3. #48
    Senior Contributor Archer's Avatar
    Join Date
    13 Oct 03
    Posts
    1,100
    GG, rushed for time so I will just address a few points:

    Yes the AT-8/11 is good for the T-80. Because her gun doesn't have the range or accuracy that the western tanks have. And the AT-11 claims only a 80% hit accuracy at 4K.
    Then what about LAHAT? Also the Pk value is interesting, but we need to see a Probability chart overlaid against actual targets to be more certain...ie if a missile misses the lower hull but impacts the top, its still somewhat worthwhile depending on the tank..

    Concerned, yes. And it might slow the operation down. But its not a show stopper.
    You know seeing the present Lebanon thingy, where IEDs plus obsolete Fagots and Saggers are stopping Merkavas, I wonder how any armour would fare against huge numbers of state of the art ATGMs..from Kornets to tank launched ones to the latest TOWs etc. It'd be a massacre..I dunno, but even with infantry cover, its going to be pretty heavy..

    Until they engage in actual combat.
    This, to be honest is bias. When Russian systems have been used by competent troops, they have worked, and worked well. See the IAF operations in 71 with its MiG-21s (which knocked down starfighters), and Su-7's- a tank of an aircraft which its pilots swore by..
    Russian kit has got a bad rep from fools like the Iraqis using it..some did well, (73 Easting) but the rest seemed to have been half hearted..
    During the Cold War, Russian kit used to be pretty level (via numbers, or overall impact) vs US...
    There was a very illuminating exchange between Russian and US experts on Tanknet not long back...which went to describe how either side was pretty much "current" with the other, till the fall of the SU put paid to them..
    In some areas the west clearly led...but it would be really incorrect to state that Russian eqpt does not perform in combat..
    If the dictum is based on Iraqis with obsolete T-72s against well drilled Americans in M1A1s, then the comparison is already skewed to begin with..
    Karmani Vyapurutham Dhanuhu

    My bow is stretched for its task

  4. #49
    Banned Senior Contributor dalem's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Nov 04
    Location
    Columbia Heights, MN
    Posts
    13,048
    Quote Originally Posted by Archer
    Russian kit has got a bad rep from fools like the Iraqis using it..some did well, (73 Easting) but the rest seemed to have been half hearted..
    73 Easting? "did well"? I guess if you count actually staying in position and being destroyed almost entirely without inflicting any real damage on one's enemy "doing well" then you'd be impressed with the Iraqi's performance, both in men and equipment, at 73 Easting.

    Sheesh.

    -dale

  5. #50
    Senior Contributor Archer's Avatar
    Join Date
    13 Oct 03
    Posts
    1,100
    Quote Originally Posted by dalem
    73 Easting? "did well"? I guess if you count actually staying in position and being destroyed almost entirely without inflicting any real damage on one's enemy "doing well" then you'd be impressed with the Iraqi's performance, both in men and equipment, at 73 Easting.

    Sheesh.

    -dale
    Your useless condescension apart, and the fact that you are clearly unable to debate without resorting to juvenile sarcasm, does make me think that you dont deserve being debated with.

    Do go to Tanknet and ask those who fought 73 Easting about the Iraqis. They earned respect that day for having tried to do their job despite all the limitations of their equipment, irrespective of the conclusion.

    But of course, the greater point is that you chose to fixate on this- versus the larger gist of the message.

    Your reflexive "my toys are the best" attitude is awesome- in that sense you dont differ much from the russian weapons are the best fanatics.

    Cheers.
    Last edited by Archer; 02 Aug 06, at 11:48.
    Karmani Vyapurutham Dhanuhu

    My bow is stretched for its task

  6. #51
    Banned Senior Contributor dalem's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Nov 04
    Location
    Columbia Heights, MN
    Posts
    13,048
    Quote Originally Posted by Archer
    Your useless condescension apart, and the fact that you are clearly unable to debate without resorting to juvenile sarcasm, does make me think that you dont deserve being debated with.

    Do go to Tanknet and ask those who fought 73 Easting about the Iraqis. They earned respect that day for having tried to do their job despite all the limitations of their equipment, irrespective of the conclusion.

    But of course, the greater point is that you chose to fixate on this- versus the larger gist of the message.

    Your reflexive "my toys are the best" attitude is awesome- in that sense you dont differ much from the russian weapons are the best fanatics.

    Cheers.
    I'm just pointing out that the example you used for Iraqi forces doing well (part of your "bad user" argument to defend the quality of Sov equipment) was another crushing defeat during which they managed effectively zero kills.

    It's not solely about the toys, of course, but since the point of this thread IS about the toys specifically, your point struck me as particularly weak.

    -dale

  7. #52
    Senior Contributor Archer's Avatar
    Join Date
    13 Oct 03
    Posts
    1,100
    Dale,
    Depending upon who you ask and which source you read- the Tawakhalnas last stand was pretty hard fought, theres still a heck a lot of debate about how many kills they had vs friendly fire..besides, without thermal imagers and first gen p!ss poor APFSDS, zilch air support they might have as well as thrown rocks at Mc Master & co...but they did stand & fight..which is what I was referring to..not all Iraqis ran up & surrendered to UAVs..

    Also, the point is that the Iraqis apart, there are other countries that have used Soviet eqpt effectively and like it for its advantages in certain areas & that the current lopsided disparity in armament technology is pretty much due to the fall of the Soviet Union..otherwise, it would have been the good old spy vs spy thingy.
    Last edited by Archer; 03 Aug 06, at 07:27.
    Karmani Vyapurutham Dhanuhu

    My bow is stretched for its task

  8. #53
    Banned Senior Contributor dalem's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Nov 04
    Location
    Columbia Heights, MN
    Posts
    13,048
    Quote Originally Posted by Archer
    Dale,
    Depending upon who you ask and which source you read- the Tawakhalnas last stand was pretty hard fought, theres still a heck a lot of debate about how many kills they had vs friendly fire..besides, without thermal imagers and first gen p!ss poor APFSDS, zilch air support they might have as well as thrown rocks at Mc Master & co...but they did stand & fight..which is what I was referring to..not all Iraqis ran up & surrendered to UAVs..

    Also, the point is that the Iraqis apart, there are other countries that have used Soviet eqpt effectively and like it for its advantages in certain areas & that the current lopsided disparity in armament technology is pretty much due to the fall of the Soviet Union..otherwise, it would have been the good old spy vs spy thingy.
    I acknowledge some of your points but still disagree in summary and stand by my statements. Practically no Soviet piece of military equipment on tracks or with propellers has been the equal or superior of its Western counterpart, where there were counterparts. From what I understand however, I believe the Sov SAM systems surpassed those of the West, and some few of the MiG series, I'm thinking specifically the MiG-15 and MiG-21 were every bit as capable as their Western counterparts in their day. And no one ever complained that the big planes, the Bears and the like, were sub-standard.

    In short, I have a lot more respect for Sov things that fly than for Sov things that clank or swim.

    -dale

  9. #54
    Idiot Mode [ON] OFF Senior Contributor YellowFever's Avatar
    Join Date
    17 Jul 06
    Posts
    6,094

    Reset..

    Ahem, to re-focus this thread...

    I find the russian's claims hard to believe that the Yasen will be anywhere near the capabilities of the Virginia.

    This wasn't like the Air Force or the Army where where american platforms were generally slightly better.

    The USN had the Soviet Navy faded by far!

    The newest Attacksub before the fall of the Soviet empire was the Akula, which was almost as good as an earlier version of a 688 (Los angeles Class).
    I'm sure most of the contacts are still classified but I think the radiated noise of an Alfa doing 5 knots was close to the radiated noise of a Los Angeles doing about 14 knots.
    The russians generally made them with tougher hulls and they built those suckers to be alot faster but their passive sonars and power plants (what really matters in any sub) were way behind that of US Subs.
    There were numerous reports of american Sub Skippers sneaking up on Soviet sub and actually taking pictures of their hulls without being detected.

    Now unless they (The russians) made a quantum leap in Submarine technology, or were able to go steal them, their submarine technology will be about 15 years behind that of the USN.
    And injecting the economies of both countries into this debate, I see the USN pulling farther ahead rather than slowing down.

    P.S. Despite what you might see on these kinda of boards or what you might find on the net, according to my Brother in law (a Navy Commander), the only Subs that can give us even a decent hard time is the Brits.
    And the Chinese uses "Helen Keller" sonars so we don't have to worry about their subs for awhile at least.....

    Now mini subs that runs on batteries....well that's a different story and the USN just bought a whole bunch from different countries to learn more...

  10. #55
    Francois
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by YellowFever
    ...the only Subs that can give us even a decent hard time is the Brits....
    Another Tom Clancy sub-effect I guess...
    I have seen pics of US carriers taken from periscopes from a dozen countries.
    Having the best tech doen't give you the hand, just an edge.
    over confident on the technology is not that good either. Remember Glamorgan and the Coral Sea.

  11. #56
    Banned Senior Contributor dalem's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Nov 04
    Location
    Columbia Heights, MN
    Posts
    13,048
    Quote Originally Posted by Francois
    Another Tom Clancy sub-effect I guess...
    I have seen pics of US carriers taken from periscopes from a dozen countries.
    Having the best tech doen't give you the hand, just an edge.
    over confident on the technology is not that good either. Remember Glamorgan and the Coral Sea.
    Also remember that peacetime is not wartime and you can't sink someone for taking pictures.

    That being said, I'm willing to go along with what I understand to be the general opinion of experienced Navy guys all over - that ANYONE's diesel sub, assuming it's reasonably modern, is enough to ruin your whole day.

    -dale

  12. #57
    Idiot Mode [ON] OFF Senior Contributor YellowFever's Avatar
    Join Date
    17 Jul 06
    Posts
    6,094
    Quote Originally Posted by Francois
    Another Tom Clancy sub-effect I guess...
    I have seen pics of US carriers taken from periscopes from a dozen countries.
    Having the best tech doen't give you the hand, just an edge.
    over confident on the technology is not that good either. Remember Glamorgan and the Coral Sea.


    Quote Originally Posted by dalem
    Also remember that peacetime is not wartime and you can't sink someone for taking pictures.

    That being said, I'm willing to go along with what I understand to be the general opinion of experienced Navy guys all over - that ANYONE's diesel sub, assuming it's reasonably modern, is enough to ruin your whole day.
    Actually, "The Hunt for Red October" really did get me interested in submarines way back when so I guess your "Another Tom Clancy sub-effect I guess..." quote does hold water.
    What I failed to mention is that yes, we do have better technology as far as submarines are concerned but what really made me confident is not so much as the platforms the USN uses but rather the higher degree of training the average boat crew gets (compared to the Russians...then or now)

    And dalem, you're absolutley right.
    These smaller AIP boats have the USN really concerned.
    A big mistake the USN made is that they have been paying alot less attention to submarine warfare (In all honesty, due to over confidence).

    Now these little yahoo boats come along and routinely waxes them in practices. Time for the USN to play a little catch-up.

  13. #58
    ? Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    06 Mar 06
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    970
    Actually the stealth for an SSK is overstated well according to rickusn.

    SSK stealth is partially a myth. WHy do I say that? Because it is usually very temporary.

    (1) A state of the art SSK has a maximum endurance of about 400km at about 4 knots on its batteries. You don't get anywhere at 4 knots and you certainly are not going to be very successful chasing your quarry at that speed. You also do not typically run your batteries 95% flat before a recharge. Rather you tend to do it at conventient times when you don't think there is anyone around to find and kill you. When you surface to run your diesels you have very little stealthy on your side. You are noisy and at periscope depth. In fact, every other thing aside, running fast and near the surface is doubly bad acoustically because your screw cavitate like hell near the surface whereas at depth the water pressures migates the formation of vaccum pockets on the trailing edged of your screw reducing or eliminating cavitation. Radars can find your snorkel, SSNs and ASW ships can hear your from a long way off and aircrafts can literally see you at that depth. You are basically exposing yourself!

    (2) There is always the option of AIPs. The problem is that firstly AIPs, probably with exception of the Fuel Cell, is not as silent as motors on batteries. The sterling is a reciprocating piston engine running of separately heated working gas. The Close cycle diesel is exactly that a diesel engine running on diesel fuel, oxygen and part of its recycled exhaust. The MESMA is a steam turbine running on the products of alcohol-oxygen combustion. They all make more noise than a battery does and they all have exhausts to get rid of. The worst thing howeveris that power density is in usually horrible enough that cruise speed on AIP is no better than 5-6 knots and there is every little power left over to recharge the batteries in a timely manner. The Fuel Cell which is the quietest AIP setup also happens to have the worst energy density by a long shot... large PEM stacks, large LOX tanks and huge LH2 tanks, all for less energy yield than the combustion type AIPs. In the end what it means is that AIP boats usually transit or maneuver tactically by running their diesels and running on the surface or at snorkel depth to get close to their quary. In a real war with a massive navy like the USN, a lot of them will be picked off while doing this by ASW aircraft and a forward screen of SSNs.

    (3) The other fallacy is that batteries and electric motor equals total silence. This is nonsense. In fact, it is frequently not flow noise and propeller noise which shows up most prominently on a sonar system when an SSK is picked up. It is frequently the inverter buzz from the switching inverters which the SSK uses to convert its DC battery power to AC current to run its motors with. Just about all high power motors are AC induction motors.

    (4) The last thing when cosidering using diesels against a major surface action group is that all the silencing advantage is useless against active sonar which is routinely employed on ASW helos and once they catch a glimpse of you, an SSK has neither the speed on the endurance to slip away. Once found you are usually dead meat.
    AIP is used for silent and slow running, at higher speeds they use diesel and battery which isn't as quiet.So in short AIP/Diesel subs don't have much tactical spped(max speed at which you can stay quiet).For example A seawolf is quieter at 25 knots than a Los angeles class at pierside.I'd put my money on the Seawolf and Virginia instead of AIP subs for the navy.the Virginia is very good at hunting littoral threats. A single AN /BQQ 10 set has more computing power than the entire los angeles class fleet. The TB 29A has a 500% increase in range against quiet littoral threats in cluttered environments, and the LWWAA uses fiber optics to hunt for quiet diesel threats. Not to mention the hig freq sonar is alos great for this.The quieter youa re the better your passive sensorsare. I heard that a Seawolf or Virginia can hear the voices of people talking ina kilo class sub.AIP subs are much better suited for the coast guard not necessarily the navy.
    Last edited by Shadowsided; 04 Aug 06, at 20:57.

  14. #59
    Ex-Wabber Defense Professional
    Join Date
    10 Dec 04
    Posts
    7,029
    Quote Originally Posted by urmomma158
    ...I'd say it'd be different if they we're up against a Seawolf or Virginia.
    urmomma, I'm glad you posted that last bit. I was going to point out to yellow fever that it is not only the Brits who do very well with SSK's. The Aussies are at the top of the list also with the Collins class, and their knowledge and technological proficiency wrt acoustics is second to none. We share our fire control systems and torps with them, and they reciprocate with noise cancellation and sensor tech.
    "We will go through our federal budget – page by page, line by line – eliminating those programs we don’t need, and insisting that those we do operate in a sensible cost-effective way." -President Barack Obama 11/25/2008

  15. #60
    Banned Senior Contributor dalem's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Nov 04
    Location
    Columbia Heights, MN
    Posts
    13,048
    I'm not trying to imply that SSKs are magic, just that they are just as dangerous in their element as an SSN. And since there are essentially zero SSN threats out there for a USCVBG to worry about these days, I focus on the SSKs.

    It's also a healthy exercise for me to remember "simple" SSKs when I feel my USA! USA! USA! Tom Clancy Powers taking over more than their fair share of my psyche.

    -dale

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. World Navies in Review
    By rickusn in forum Naval Warfare
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 15 Jun 07,, 04:51
  2. Russian Naval Analysis
    By rickusn in forum Naval Warfare
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 19 Jul 06,, 07:05
  3. Russian Navy
    By rickusn in forum Naval Warfare
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 17 Feb 05,, 04:55

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •