Naval Pictures V: The Glorious Fifth

[Kidd]

Am I the only one who reacted to the scene of the sub coming out of the explosion with "no way does a sub get that close to a blast and maintain structural integrity?"

It's one of those "has fallen" type movies

Any logical reaction to anything going on should start with "No way"

Typhoon and Akula?

[marauder648]

Yep a Typhoon with an Akula for scale.

[worktroll]

There's a reason they call the Typhoon "5 subs in very close formation"

[I am Belch II]

So very nice to see the size difference.

[Feenix74]

It's one of those "has fallen" type movies

The best comment I saw was that it should be called "The Hunt for Red Olympus"  ;D

[I am Belch II]

I saw in the trailer that there were some of the shore batteries for anti-ship missiles. That was neat to see.

[truetanker]

That underwater torpedo scene explosion of the sub reminds me of another movie, Virus of 1980 release with Sonny Chiba, Chuck Conners and others. Same arctic scene, except it was antarctic.

TT

[Luciora]

Down Periscope did it best, and it was a comedy.

That underwater torpedo scene explosion of the sub reminds me of another movie, Virus of 1980 release with Sonny Chiba, Chuck Conners and others. Same arctic scene, except it was antarctic.

TT

[marauder648]

Down Periscope did it best, and it was a comedy.

I've heard some folks call Down Periscope a Documentary :D

[I am Belch II]

I thought the Down Periscope was really cool with the idea, of a older SS going after the navy bases. From what I understand the SS of now a days are quite quiet, even better then a SSN.

[Kidd]

A modern SSK, yes. Especially one with air-independent propulsion. But not the relic depicted in Down Periscope :D

[glitterboy2098]

well, a modern build Conventional is usually quieter than nuclear.. but the older stuff from WW2 and early cold war, like the baleo class used in the film, not so much. too many non-hydrodynamic protrusions and shapes involved.

but those older subs are the ones usually being sold off to the third world, so as a concept the film made a lot of sense. especially the idea of the enemy being unconventional.

interestingly, in 2005 the Us navy borrowed a Gotland class sub and crew from the Swedish navy, for wargames of just that sort of scenario. it didn't go well for the US Navy, as the Gotland proved really hard to detect, and was able to sink a US Carrier group and several of our nuclear subs over the course of several scenarios conducted between 2005 and 2007.
admittedly the Gotland class is (and remains in 2018) one of the most advanced conventional subs in the world, with all sorts of systems to make it hard to detect (Air independent propulsion systems, anti-magnetic anomaly detection systems, etc) but since a lot of potentially hostile countries were starting to update to conventional subs with forms of such tech, it was a good learning experience.

[JadeHellbringer]

That was entertaining. The USN kind of went into it as 'hey, this'll be handy training for us hunting Kilo-class boats and such, come on down and let us use you for target practice!'.

Oops. I suspect a whole lot of foreheads got slapped at the Pentagon when those exercises ended and the data started getting pored over. (I also suspect a lot of Baltic neighbors were surprised and intrigued by the results as well- the guy next door did WHAT to a Nimitz-group?)

[Kidd]

The Gotland and its crew scored first in a regular NATO exercise. After which the USN requested a few more exercises specifically to reinvestigate the SSK threat.

Which of course was picked up by media and spun, still running stories as recently as a couple months back, that a European diesel sub has just obsoleted the entire USN fleet and all those multi billion dollar ships are sitting duck white elephants, what is the govt doing, oh the perfidy of the military industrial complex, yadda yadda

[marauder648]

diesel subs are very quiet but they have a large number of tactical and strategic drawbacks that mean that pound for pound, nuclear boats are better. 

Even with AIP motors and the latest batteries, a diesel sub is slower when running on its batteries as it will wear then down quicker, this gives a nuclear boat a higher tactical and strategic speed.  The tactical speed means that the nuke boat has more defensive options open to it, it can run harder and faster than any DE boat without fear of running low on batteries and that extra speed could mean life or death. 

I did recall reading somewhere that a diesel electric boat is more like a mobile minefield mainly due to their lower speeds.  If you can position it to strike or are in a position where your targets are coming towards you, then you're very dangerous, but if you have to chase, then you're at a disadvantage because you've got to recharge the batteries some time and if you'r target is a 20 knot group of Warships moving away from you, you're probably never going to make that intercept. 

[kato]

The Gotland and its crew scored first in a regular NATO exercise.

Nah, SSK attack runs on CBGs were always pretty standard. In the 80s German, Canadian and British (and of course USN) SSKs were used (successfully), in the 90s and early 00s the rather modern Dutch and Australian SSKs were used. Gotland was leased in late 2004 with her crew specifically to tackle this problem.

The decisive factor was supposedly the series of HMAS Onslow sinking USS Carl Vinson in RIMPAC 98*, HNLMS Walrus sinking USS Theodore Roosevelt in JTFEX/TMDI 99, HMAS Waller sinking two SSNs and coming into attack range of USS Abraham Lincoln in RIMPAC 2000, again HMAS Waller sinking two LPDs in OP Tandem Thrust in 2001, HMAS Sheean sinking two LPDs in RIMPAC 02 and supposedly (without details) a pack of three Collins sinking two SSN and a CVN in exercises in 2003.

Your sentence is still correct though of course. RIMPAC or the Australian exercises ain't NATO exercises, and JTFEX/TMDI in '99 was multilateral beyond NATO i think.

* the same year French SSN Casabianca sank USS Dwight D. Eisenhower and Tico escort USS Anzio in OP Pean. In RIMPAC 96 Chilean Type 209-1400 CS Simpson sank USS Independence. 1997 broke the series as there was no carrier sinking in an exercise; however that year a Russian SSN was found in attack range of USS Constellation.

well, a modern build Conventional is usually quieter than nuclear..

Far less heat too. Nuclear subs are virtually unusable in littoral waters since they can even be detectable on IR from e.g. ASW aircraft in such conditions. Besides their size of course, at least for USN models.

Even with AIP motors and the latest batteries, a diesel sub is slower when running on its batteries as it will wear then down quicker, this gives a nuclear boat a higher tactical and strategic speed.

The speed is mostly decisive in defensively escorting a CBG at full speed. There have been experiments switching modern SSKs for SSNs operationally, in particular Australian and German SSKs; they've been found to operate fully equivalently and tactically scoring equivalently as well.

[Feenix74]

I am not a submariner or even a squid and I will happily be corrected by those who are that frequent this thread. However I get the impression from the submariners who I know (who are generally SSK operators), if you are having to use high speed and deplete your batteries then you are doing it wrong.

[Wrangler]

HMS Magpie, British Surveyor ship.  Very brave crews with that wave.

[Nightlord01]

I am not a submariner or even a squid and I will happily be corrected by those who are that frequent this thread. However I get the impression from the submariners who I know (who are generally SSK operators), if you are having to use high speed and deplete your batteries then you are doing it wrong.

Yes and no, it all depends on the tactical situation. SSK's nave a notably different operational profile than nukes, and some of the manoevres do require high speed sprints, but they do tend to be the perennial slowpokes of the sea.

HMS Magpie, British Surveyor ship.  Very brave crews with that wave.

Looks like she is surveying a reef somewhere, noting that breaking wave. No danger to the crew provided she doesn't bottom out.

[ANS Kamas P81]

Picture the SSK like a deer hunter in a treestand, sitting in one spot silent as the grave and letting targets come to it.  The SSN is more of a stalker, searching for and tailing its prey while making a little movement noise (pumps and reactor coolant systems).

Not that either hull couldn't do the other job, but the diesel can only stalk for so long before it has to recharge and that forces breaking way off your contact, while even crewed with nothing but pillows and bunny slippers while fully stopped, the nuclear sub is still percolating quietly.

[JadeHellbringer]

I think Tom Clancy was the one who described SSKs as 'mobile minefields', able to dominate the area they're in but not really CONTROL it the way an SSN can- after all, the SSK has to come up for air, go home for fuel, all the fun things like that, while the nuke boat doesn't much care about any of that. I always liked that description. It's very apt in a way- because of the air and fuel requirements (particularly the former), an SSK tends to stay more in coastal areas that it can control- straights in particular, where the prey has to come right to it. (Imagine a Kilo sitting at an end of the Suez Canal, for example), while an SSN could go just about anywhere one could want so long as there's food and munitions on board for it.

[Sabelkatten]

Modern conventional subs have underwater endurance of 30+ days (Stirling engine or fuel cells), but it's true they're rather slow in that mode.

[Wrangler]

Aren't the submarine fleets of individual nations known to have not alot of Submarines in general, never mind ones with AIP equipped?  Most countries i've read about Naval strength barely has a half dozen Submarines tops.   That's not very sustainable force if things get rough right?

[Kidd]

It's not too bad a navy to even have half a dozen operational submarines frankly

[JadeHellbringer]

Aren't the submarine fleets of individual nations known to have not alot of Submarines in general, never mind ones with AIP equipped?  Most countries i've read about Naval strength barely has a half dozen Submarines tops.   That's not very sustainable force if things get rough right?

If that's all your opponent has as well, you're in good shape. Build to match the neighbors, all that.

[snewsom2997]

If that's all your opponent has as well, you're in good shape. Build to match the neighbors, all that.

Yeah, most of those small sub forces were meant to supplement either the US or the Russians, or are a National Pride thing like the Argentinian or Indian Navy.

[Weirdo]

You'd be surprised to find out how few navies have "Enforce superiority over one or more oceans" in their mission statement. Same goes for "Expect to beat an ocean-controlling navy in a stand-up fight".

[I am Belch II]

Seeing the trailer for Hunter Killer it reminded me of Battleship. Something that should be cool but you are not 100 % sold on the movie.

[JadeHellbringer]

Seeing the trailer for Hunter Killer it reminded me of Battleship. Something that should be cool but you are not 100 % sold on the movie.

If a movie reminds you of 'Battleship', it's probably going to be more fun to eat a lit road flare than see that movie.

God, that was a piece of shit.

[Wrangler]

Some assembly required.  Incomplete Jean Bart sailing from Casablanca to Cherbourg in 1945 for repairs.