Posted on 01/12/2021 7:04:09 AM PST by Onthebrink
In December, Saab announced that it delivered the second Gotland-class submarine to the Swedish Defense Material Administration (FMV) after a mid-life upgrade. Along with the lead boat of the class, the Swedish Navy operates three of the diesel-electric submarines, which were designed and built by Kockums shipyard. Designed as a multirole submarine, the Gotland-class could be used in anti-surface warfare (ASuW), anti-submarine warfare (ASW), collection of intelligence including communications intelligence (COMINT) and electronic signals intelligence (ELINT), as well as forward surveillance, special operations and mine laying – the submarines have proven to be well-suited to each.
Why So Special?
The first submarines in the world to feature a Stirling engine air-independent propulsion (AIP) system, these have an extended endurance of weeks – a capability that had previously only been available in nuclear-powered submarines.
(Excerpt) Read more at 19fortyfive.com ...
LOL. What a joke. We track real enemy subs 7x24 with our SSNs and with SOSUS. We can't tell you all that so you can go on thinking they sunk a CVN...
These AIP type submarines are still powered by diesel fuel and batteries. So they are range limited and if they run into a good anti-submarine hunter team they are very vulnerable to the fact that they are diesel/electrics.
If you have no power you can’t create oxygen to breath. If you get pounced on and are forced to go down deep your going to be in a fix. I’m sure their subsurface speeds are not as good as a nuke boat as well.
Oh!In my previous comment #23 I forgot to mention that this “sinking” was simulated during a training exercise.Though it shows how important the anti-submarine forces have to be.They have to be alert 24 hours a day for just such activities.The cost otherwise would be a tremendous loss of life and a multi-billion dollar asset.
Not really. The AIP subs can run 20 kts submerged, they have ranges of 7000 miles, and can stay down three weeks at a time without a need to snorkel. And they are quieter than any nuke.
LOL
I am convinced you can NEVER get the smell of diesel and amine out of your clothes.
They still have to surface to recharge their batteries. Nuke boats are much more efficient.
No doubt, but their cost is prohibitive......
There is a mission for Homeland close-to-shore subs that could be filled by a less expensive alternative.....
If the propulsion system is that great and we can save considerable cost over nuclear, why haven’t we adopted it?
__________________________________________________________
A good legitimate question that has more than one answer.
First, time underwater can translate to distance underwater. When patroling the water around your borders distance is not important. When patroling the entire world then the Nuclear power makes a lot more sense.
Second, these are small submarines and carry a relatively small weapons payload. I’m not denigrating their abilities they are very effective weapons platforms but the US Subs have a much larger weapons load and crew and therefore need a much larger propulsion system. We kept diesel boats for several deades after the nuclear boats were developed but they outlived their usefulness in time. The SSBN (what used to be called Polaris and Posiden boats) are twice as long and and have more than twice the beam of the small boats. It takes a lot of energy to push these boats at 25 knots for days at a time, all the while making oxygen and water.
Third, we have a system of permanent sonar hydrophones planted in the oceans around our country, the quiet is not quite as important for home defense. The newer nuclear subs being developed are much quiter than the nuclear boats I served on and quieter than the boats in service now.
So, yes these little boats are really great for what they are made for but they serve a different purpose than our boats. We have learned a lot from these little boats and will match them for noise soon.
Thank you for your detailed, well-informed response and service.....
I have forgotten the hydrodynamics, but, true, the surface wave is harder to overcome than the resistance of being fully submerged.
Thick headed DOD. Not as versatile as a nuc boat. But perfect for some roles. Biggest disadvantage is that they do not cost as much.
Anything mechanical puts out noise. For submarines it's just a matter of knowing what to look for and where to look for it. Anyone who thinks that the U.S. Navy didn't come out of their time spent playing with the Gotland knowing exactly how to track AIP subs is just kidding themselves.
Historically, electric (battery) boats did not have the range that nuclear boats did. They are great for littoral defense and very difficult to hunt. The needs of the US have been historically to be able to project power as opposed to our own coastal defense, so we have focused on nuke power and quieting to have the range, stamina, and stealth to do the mission. If an electric system comes along that can match those capabilities, we might be inclined to switch over. I dont think the range and endurance without coming up; to snorkel at some point has been matched yet, but electric is getting better all the time.
(Snicker, snicker)
Thought that.
Not really. The AIP subs can run 20 kts submerged, they have ranges of 7000 miles, and can stay down three weeks at a time without a need to snorkel. And they are quieter than any nuke
________________________________________________________
While it is true they can run 20kts submerged they cannot do it for very long. High speed uses up the battery very quickly. On AIP top speed is around 7 knots. They have to go to periscope depth to run the diesel and charge the battery, a dangerous operation if you are being hunted.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.