Attention all registered users. The new forum upgrade requires you to reset your password as you logon for the first time.
To reset your password choose this option that is displayed when you attempted to login with your username: "Forgotten your password? Click here!"
You will be sent an e-mail to the address that is associated with your forum account. Follow the simple directions to reset your password.
If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
It's my understanding that the navy brass will NOT allow any diesel development for fear it'll kill off the nuclear fleet. One of the last diesel boats to ever serve in the US fleet is six miles from my home and as a hunter killer it could run circles around a lot of the non NATO boats. She was even allegedly quieter then the first gen Los Angles class boats, but battery power has it's drawbacks. The US wet leased a Gotland for tests that proved to be a bit of a disaster.
As for nuclear power, look at some of the countries developing and building diesel & AIP boats. Germany, Sweden, South Korea, Japan, India, Pakistan, North Korea (DPRK), Iran, China, and Twain are all diesel sub fleets with Russia operating a few with some being built for export. Most of these countries don't have the capability to build a submarine reactor and if they do they can't afford it. Something else to consider too is that China is a nuclear power that is a sudo ally of Russia, yet they're having to develop their nuclear fleet on their own. Most (US and UK being an exception) nuclear navies don't share nuclear propulsion technology, even with friends. The upside of a reactor is its huge amount of energy generation that allows for an oxygen plant, the ability to never need to surface, enough fuel to go anywhere without refueling, and a cruising speed that can get you somewhere in a decent amount of time. AIP boats are still low on power generation and they still burn fuel and they still have a slow cruising speed to conserve fuel and energy. Remember, AIP is a supplement to battery power at this point in development so even AIP boats must snorkel to recharge but their endurance is better. Next is size, you never see any huge diesel boats (but there were some big ones), but the largest subs ever built are nuclear because the reactor allows for a larger and heavier boat. Imagine how much diesel it would take (let alone the engines required) to power and propel a Typhoon or any other boomer, and thats before we add in the batteries required. More batteries with multiple diesel engines with what would probably be free flooding gas tanks would take up a lot of space that could be used for weapons platforms or living quarters. The up side to conventional subs is how quiet a well designed one can be when it isn't charging. If need be, the only moving part on the boat could be the electric drive motor. On a nuclear boat the coolant and steam are constantly being circulated to generate power and so on and to keep the rods from doing things like having a runaway reaction. There are pros and cons to both boats, but during the cold war the US Navy had some conventional sub related events that pushed us into the nuclear age in hopes that those events wouldn't repeat.
While I agree that the US should have some conventional boats, I don't expect to see any in the near future especially when we can barrow one from a NATO ally from time to time.
As for a modern Diesel boat? Well let me put it this way, I went to college with some Indians so I can say I'm just as tall as they are and well, watch this-https://youtu.be/Zh9WS9C72Hg. This is one of their Sindhughosh Class boats (INS Sindhukirti) which is an exported version of the Russian Kilo and having been in a Balao, a Barbel, and one other conventional class thats name escapes me, I will say that Sindhukirti looks like my idea of entry level hell. China and Iran operate these boats as well, but it should be noted that even India is working on a nuclear sub.
Keep in mind though that a nuclear sub is a very expensive venture. The development, fuel rods, waste, maintenance and so on are a lot more then a conventional sub. When the Soviet Union collapsed and the fleet maintenance budget evaporated, who do you think covered the cost of fuel and reactor disposal? Norway, the United States, and Great Britain did (and I think still are) under The Arctic Military Environmental Cooperation (AMEC). Later on other developments happened like Cooperative Threat Reduction and I think some other nations funded the program as well. With by comparison little effort, you can clean up a conventional sub and it'll be perfect for a new life as an artificial reef, or target, or both. A nuclear reactor and its fuel doesn't translate into a quick, cheap, or easy disposal.
As kind of a sick joke, while all of this foreign funding was paying for disposal, a few Russian nuclear ships were launched, like an icebreaker and the Borei Class.
Remember the WWII SHERMAN tank, not the best , not the bigest, not the bigest gun, ------------------BUT--------------------there were gazillions of them swarming the Nazi/German tiger and panzer tanks, and they prevailed. This isn't rocket science, we need a series of AIP subs at each and every sub base we have or use.
Remember the saying-----"the knats are learning how to kill the elephants"
Come on America, start cranking out ADVANCED AIP submarines, and have both nuclear and AIP.
The commander of U.S. forces in the Pacific and Indian Oceans praised the Navy’s $2.7 billion Virginia-class attack submarines (SSNs) and stressed the value
Once you factor in trying to put together a whole new training regimen, production line, logistics and parts support, it ends up being totally cost ineffective to build our own and produces minimal gain. We have awesome allies who have diesels that are great that can fill those roles. Trust me. I am a huge fan of diesels even though I am a nuke. I love studying the design and conversions of postwar diesels, but I can't imagine is going back and trying to split our knowledge and experience base. We already have divergent knowledge between SSN and SSBN and coast and operational areas. Diesels would break it out even more.
Tweet
Comment