Posted on 10/23/2021 1:08:12 PM PDT by RomanSoldier19
When Australia decided to buy a fleet of new nuclear-powered attack submarines earlier this month, it sparked international outrage. China labelled it a “cold war, zero sum mentality”. France was enraged at being left out. The deal will cost Australia $100 billion, and hand UK and US technology to a fleet of attack submarines, the apex predators of naval warfare. But by the time they are delivered in 20 years’ time, these submarines could be obsolete.
No one really knows how these submarines would perform in a conflict situation. It’s true that submarines have occasionally launched cruise missiles at land targets, but there has been no real submarine combat since 1982, when HMS Conqueror torpedoed the General Belgrano off the Falklands. Exactly how well submarines fare against modern anti-submarine warfare (ASW) forces is a continuing debate.
“There is a natural arms race between submarines, particularly nuclear-powered ones, and surface navies,” says submarine warfare author HI Sutton. “Broadly, submarines still appear to have the advantage.” Sutton says that Australia’s decision to tear up its 2016 contract for a diesel-powered submarine fleet with France and go nuclear instead was driven by the need for endurance provided by nuclear power, which enables a sub to stay underwater for literally years at a stretch, making its own oxygen.
The HSU-001 is a Large Displacement Unmanned Underwater Vehicle (LDUUV). The actual capabilities of HSU-001 are largely unknown. The HSU-001 is thought to be optimized for seabed warfare. The HSU-001 has limited endurance and is expected to be complimented by longer range UUVs in Chinese service.
(Excerpt) Read more at wired.co.uk ...
” which enables a sub to stay underwater for literally years at a stretch, making its own oxygen.”
“But can it make its own food?”
Probably not, but there is certainly plenty of food...down there. Would be interesting to develop a way to capture some of it. Maybe not for a full diet, but if they can displace meat, that means other rations could be larger.
...of course the men (and officers) there will not be too happy with even longer deployments.
” But by the time they are delivered in 20 years’ time, these submarines could be obsolete.”
What B.S.. Australia needs new submarines today.Not in twenty years. specifically with their old Collins class boats.
Those ships will not survive long.
Some. Hydroponics, fresh veggies, soy, beans. Probably not a full menu but even a occasional salad would be very welcome!
Why does it take a generation to deliver these subs?
Is that Australia’s choice or US manufacturing capacity?
Huh…..
Septic tanks with propellers.
Dr. Strangelove could be consulted about the crew demographics and things might be better.
I never forgot the sage advice of a fast attack SSN CO regarding ships vs subs - ‘Never get in a swordfight with a sub because you’ll lose 99 percent of the time.’
The USN is currently adding 2 - 3 attack subs per year. Until recently it was 1 - 2 per year. I’m guessing that is pretty much ‘capacity’ given the cost of accumulating the advanced materials, propulsion systems and the shipyard capacity. Add to this say 1 Australian sub per year with the first being delivered in say 5 years?
This was when aircraft dropping lightweight torpedoes or another sub becomes your only real defensive options.
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.