Posted on 10/20/2006 12:01:51 PM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
Accoustics is still the only way to passively detect a target from any distance. Magnetic anomaly detection has been around since the second world war. It's a localization tool used by aircraft, you have to fly right over the target for the anomaly detector to register. If they're working with ultra-low frequency then they haven't perfected anything I'm aware of.
What to be skeptical of is when you see reports of (Insert Third World Country Here)'s air force in an exercise kicking the butts of American F-15s and F-16s, like in India a few months back.....those exercises are basically rigged, the US forces have their hands tied behind their backs - serves two purposes -1) The local third world country gets confidence and favorable pub 2) The Air Force, which is notoriously good at getting money, gets more ammo to ask for LOTS of F-22s, which is their main procurement goal.
In THIS case, however - believe it - a well-trained modern sub like this Swedish one is a very, very, very difficult opponent.
Really all modern subs from any country with a modicum of training is incredibly dangerous.
There actually were no "submarines" in World War II, other than the very late war German Electroboats, hydrogen peroxide subs, etc. - they were all "submersibles" - spent the vast majority of time on the surface.
Other than one shot in the Falklands, we've never really seen what subs can do now - and they've advanced faster than antisubmarine warfare advanced. In any large-scale naval war I suspect modern well-trained subs of any kind would rule the seas.
Fortunately, few of our potential opponents are likely as well-trained as the crew of the Gotland. It's very smart for the US Navy to lease those guys to practice agains (and I have a feeling the average Swedish seaman isn't violently protesting being stationed in San Diego - I wonder if they brought over their familes and put them up in San Diego, though.)
Do they have the "legs" to present a sustained threat in open water? Seems to me if they have to surface, even after a month, they become targets. And CERTAINLY they'll have to refuel, either from a surface ship or in port. Again, they become targets.
I can see how they would present a short-term threat to surface shipping...perhaps even warships. But over the longer term, nothing but targets.
Sure,they will have to surface & they can be sunk,just like any other ship,including N-boats which have to go up after about 90 days.The point is their potential for damage in the 2 or 3 weeks they are down in wartime.What's the point in sinking a 500 million dollar ship with 30 fellows on it after it has hit a SSN with 4 times the number of men & over thrice the cost,not mentioning surface ships.
Modern AIP technology is just evolving.This Swedish 'Sterling' AIP cannot go beyond 20 days-the new German fuel cell based systems can go upto 28 days & everyone is doing research to further that endurance.
The Germans have a new class of silent subs...based on fuel cell technology for generating electricity.....was on PBS couple of days ago.
One other note: How well can they detect us? US subs find it nearly impossible to detect another US sub.
Lets also hope that Sweeden isn't going goin to just sell these things to just any Tom, Dick, or Muhammad.
The German technology is better than this Swedish one & it's already been sold to around 5 nations with others in the pipeline.Only Japan has opted for the Swedish system.The firm building the Gotland is now a wholly owned subsidary of the German sub maker,HDW.
Why can't we use frikin' sharks with frikin' lasers on their heads?
For Sweden to sell it,they'd need a go-ahead of sorts from the Germans as their sub-builder has been brought by a German firm.Besides,there are other equally capable or better AIP options including French & Russian ones.The first export submarine to feature an AIP is a Pakistani vessel which uses the French "MESMA" system.
While U.S. nukes are the quietest there are, there is a limit. Reactors require pumps, pumps produce noise, and an extremely sophisticated detection system like the Swedes have, coupled with experienced and well trained operators, can detect anything detectable.
The Persian Gulf area is tailormade for these boats or similar types. There is ample Iranian coastline to shelter and even fuel from, and with the worlds most important shipping lane within touching distance long legs are not needed.
In such an environment i wonder if some dozens of cheaper AIP boats may be more useful than 10 expensive Virginia class boats at something like $2billion each.
And remember, these Gotland class are old boats, the new German U212 class are better.
(rimshot)
Very funny, but it's spelled Kursk.
The Swedes are very careful who they export arms to. And they don't sell their high-end stuff.
I'm not, diesel electrics have been pulling off the sneaky bastard routine during NATO exercises for decades. I talked with a dutch sub crew in the late 80's and they had finished a recent exercise where they nailed one of our carriers.
Sub ping ....
Diego Garcia would be an ideal sub base for US SSK's covering the Indian Ocean, Suez Canal and Persian Gulf.
I'm sure Tarawa, Guam or Iwo jima would be good for the Western Pacific as well.
I wish we were building these too.
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.