Pentagon: New Class Of Silent Submarines Poses Threat

NBC4.TV ^ | October 19, 2006 | Chuck Henry

[Migraine]

silent submarines -- subs that the U.S. Navy is having trouble finding under water

Betcha my wife could hear 'em...

[Gandalf_The_Gray]

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.

Bigger LOX tanks? I thought the Gotland was really clever when I first read of the joint exercise. But now I'm convinced that the German (fuel cell) technology is potentially better. It eliminates the necessity of dumping the combustion products of the Stirling engines' heater out of the pressure hull. It also reduces the moving parts count to a minimum.

Both the Swedish and German boats are very small and can offer only limited storage space for torpedoes and/or missiles. The Gotland was ferried to San Diego with a surface ship. It appears that these "pocket" subs are best suited to coastal defense and may have problems with "blue water" sailing. Our best defense may be to just stand off in deeper water with our missile boats.

Regards,
GtG

PS The Swedish boat is co-ed. What red blooded sewer pipe sailor could resist that duty?

[denydenydeny]

HENRY: According to Swedish newspapers, in training exercises the Gotland has sunk our most sophisticated nuclear submarines. But perhaps even more disconcerting, it reportedly sunk our largest aircraft carrier, the U.S.S. Reagan.

NORMAN POLMAR, NAVAL ANALYST: She's really run rings around our carrier groups.

It must be appropriations time again. I cannot believe that the military would be casually informing the world about its weaknesses.

I would almost guarantee that there is some sort of countermeasure for the AIP boats, for the right price.

[ccmay]

The Swedes are very careful who they export arms to. And they don't sell their high-end stuff.

I find it surprising they agreed to allow the US Navy such close scrutiny of their boat. Wouldn't they want to preserve their advantage? What do they gain by cooperating with us?

-ccm

[CenturionM]

I still haven't gotten over my grudge against Toshiba for selling out to the Soviets. Toshiba products are not allowed in my house.

[fso301]

I would imagine all training, history of the last 60 years of submarine hunting is based upon the premise that the captain and crew want to escape and live. I wonder what the tactual difference is when a crew is thinking Allah Akbar ?

Not a patentable idea. The Japanese tried it 65 years ago.

[wideminded]

I wonder why this news is even coming out of the Pentagon since it all seems like "loose lips" stuff.

[Non-Sequitur]

I find it surprising they agreed to allow the US Navy such close scrutiny of their boat. Wouldn't they want to preserve their advantage? What do they gain by cooperating with us?

Well for one thing we're paying them well for use of the boat and crew. For another thing it's great training for them. Finally I don't think they consider us high up on their list of potential threats.

[ccmay]

I suppose the crew is happy to hang out in San Diego's lovely weather for a year, hitting on hard-bodied surfer chicks.

I wonder if we get to inspect any detail of the construction and blueprints that we want.

-ccm

[Non-Sequitur]

I wonder if we get to inspect any detail of the construction and blueprints that we want.

I have no doubt that there is a lively flow of information in both directions.

[Michael.SF.]

I hope they are not the only clueless ones out there on this subject.

[John Carey]

WOW!

[Chode]

one way is to look for holes in the ocean... your passive detection decides on what the normal ambient background noise level is, then, you look for places that are LESS than the normal background level. because SOMETHING... is between you and what should be out there and if there's nothing on your charts, good chance it's not a good thing.

[sukhoi-30mki]

The Siemens fuel cells are also safer.The biggest problem with AIP now is that subs cannot go beyond 5-7 knots to achieve endurance.So the Stirlings can give you 15 days but at a speed of 3-5 knots.

Being only about 1,600 tonnes,they can hold only about 20 weapons,which is small by American standards(though a US boat weighs nearly 4 times that much for less than twice the weaponry!!!).Anyway,The Russians recently unveiled a conceptual version of their Amur-1650 class AIP submarine for the Indian navy which had an 8 cell VLS for long range cruise missiles in addition to 18 torpedo tube weapons.That's a pretty novel concept if you ask me.

[sukhoi-30mki]

I think industrial concerns can play a role in preventing the US from getting too close to the Gotland class blueprints.The firm that built it,Kockums is now part of a German firm.

[gaijin]

excellent post!

[Paul Ross]

The Russians recently unveiled a conceptual version of their Amur-1650 class AIP submarine for the Indian navy which had an 8 cell VLS for long range cruise missiles in addition to 18 torpedo tube weapons.That's a pretty novel concept if you ask me.

Well, actually that sounds like their adapting the idea from our implementation with the tactical conversions of the four Trident Subs into mere "conventionally armed" ships. They are retrofitted to carry 4 VLS tubes in each regular launch tube space to launch non-nuclear Tomahawks.

[sukhoi-30mki]

Well hasn't the USN been into VLS SSNs as it is from the late 70s???

[Paul Ross]

No. The Tomahawks were previously launched from the torpedo tubes, along with their predecessors the SUBROC missile/torpedo.

[sukhoi-30mki]

Ru sure???The L.A class attack subs built since the end of the 70s have all been armed with vertically launched Tomahawks.