OT “Das Boot” new generation stealth submarine

[Guest IguanaKing]

My point in asking the question was to get the answer. About 48 hours under ideal conditions where they don't have to evade detection from other subs, but it COULD possibly take 12 days. Multiply by 2...and...last I checked 24 was greater than 21. ;)

 

Why is the US interested in the technology? Oh, I don't know, maybe for vessels that are intended purely for coastal defense rather than expeditionary warfare? Hydrogen fuel cells, BTW, aren't new...they have been in use in buses in Chicago, IL since the mid-90's.

 

How "shallow" IS the Persian Gulf anyway...and what does it have to do with the powerplant in use?

[britgliderpilot]

How "shallow" IS the Persian Gulf anyway...and what does it have to do with the powerplant in use?

 

Ah!

 

Purely by chance, I think I can guess an answer to this.

 

 

I've read stories of the nuclear subs involved in spy missions in the Cold War sucking up silt into the reactor cooling systems when operating too shallow.

 

Electric subs don't need a seawater inflow to cool the reactor they don't have, so they can operate in shallower waters for sneaky missions :)

[Groove]

I really dont understand you question.

 

But here is a data about the 212:

 

The submarine can operate at high speed on diesel power or switch to the AIP system for silent slow cruising, staying submerged for up to three weeks without surfacing and with no exhaust heat.

 

Fuel Cells are known for very long, thats right. But this fuell cells on the 212 arent compareable with the of the Chicago`s busses :D

 

Shallow water and Nuclear Subs:

 

Shallow waters are hotter than deep see water. A nuclear reactor need cold water to function properly. A diesel / fuel cell boat dont need "cold water". I hope this helps...

[MBot]

The shallow water/deep sea water thing has lots to do with size. Nuclear subs are usualy big, wich means they have a greater electromagnetical field, have bigger active sonar returns, are usualy louder and are easier spotted by eye ( even underwater ). This means they want to stay as far away from the surface as possible to avoid dedection, wich is hard in shallow waters. Conventional subs are usualy smaller, wich means they are safer to operate undedected close to the surface.

Also conventional subs have the ability to hoover over the ground or even touch down, while nukes can't do that because they would suck in mud into the reactor cooling system ( as BGP said ).

 

Maximum operation depth has not a big impact on the subject, as most subs dive in about the same depth regions ( 200-500m ). While conventional subs can dive deep too and increase their stealthness, they usualy operate in shallow waters because of their shorter endurance and lower transit speed compared to nuke subs.

 

 

Thats what I can remember from my 688(I) and Sub Command days :)

[Groove]

Mbot, get the Sonalysts Pack !

 

- 688 I Hunter/Killer

- Dangerous Waters

- Fleet Command

- Sub Command

 

i got them all for 39.95 at steampowered.com

[Guest IguanaKing]

Again, I must ask...how "shallow" is the Persian gulf anyway? Is it more shallow than the docks that 688s operate from? The reactor requires constant cooling, not just when the sub is at sea...so how does it get away with that? A nuclear reaction is something which is managed...not something that is stopped and started at will. ;) They have operated in the Persian Gulf for years. I agree a spec ops mission might deploy quicker from a submarine with a shallower draught (an unfortunate dimensional side-effect when carrying a nuclear reactor), but what good is it when that spec ops mission has been detected by surface radar and satellite 4 times during its journey?

 

Groove, again, I told you why the US Navy is interested. Hydrogen fuel cells have been popular in public transit vehicles in the US, but the military hasn't really given them much thought. OF COURSE we'll be interested in the German implementation of this technology as it is quite useful in coastal defense. :D

[MBot]

Even 100m deep waters are considere shallow. In such shallow water there is usualy no thermal layer, wich hinders sound propagation. Such layers usualy apear only in deep water, wich subs like to use to hide bellow.

So if you have to operate in waters that are too shallow for thermal layers, you are better served with a harder to dedect conventional sub.

 

 

Don't take my exact word with those 100m btw, but in general terms I think thats the way it is.

[Guest IguanaKing]

True, but thermal layers are generally more prohibitive to active means of detection. In shallow water, if the enemy is using active SONAR or MAD gear close enough to you, you WILL be detected, no matter how silent your powerplant is. ;)

[MBot]

Sure, but nukes are big, wich means big active sonar returns and big MA fields. Conventional subs are usaly small, wich you will surely agree is preferable in that situation.

[Guest IguanaKing]

In that kind of environment? Nope, I wouldn't agree. The sub commander would have had to be pretty stupid to have gotten himself into a situation where they were hunting for him that intently. Active SONAR is something that is generally used out of desperation (i.e....KNOWING there is an imminent threat), and deployment of MAD gear is just a waste of JP-4 in a helicopter unless you have a general location to search. ;)

[Groove]

Iguana King, its obvious that you wont agree with us. I dont know why, the facts are here. And people which knows about the stuff ( engineers around the world) say that Diesel/Fuel Cell Subs are the best for coastal operations. Even the US engineers says that.

 

You wont believe but there must be some advantage above the 688i class otherwise nobody would care and nobody would be scared about diesel boats.

 

Once again: nuclear subs are loud. you cand turn off the cooling pumps. diesel / fuel cell are silent.

 

But i dont think this discussion is bringing us to a agreement. Contact your local favourite sub-naval expert and ask him about the advantages of Diesel against Nuclear.

 

And as i mentioned already, there is a difference between the technology of 90s bus fuel cells and the latest fuel cells.

[Guest IguanaKing]

Groove, its obvious that no matter what I say or how I say it, you somehow think that I disagree with the value of fuel cell subs being used for coastal defense. Perhaps you should ask your experts if the Persian Gulf in any way relates to the coastal defense of Germany or the US.

 

Try to understand what is written before interpreting my opinion for me...ok? :smilewink:

[Groove]

Here a article i found:

 

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/issues/2004/Aug/Diesel_Submarines.htm

 

Diesel-electric boats, although relatively low-tech, are emerging as a decided threat to military assets around the world and civilian targets in the United States, officials said. Unlike large nuclear-powered attack submarines, diesel boats can operate covertly in coastal areas or in the vicinity of U.S. floating bases, possibly blocking U.S. access to combat zones and making U.S. vessels vulnerable to torpedo attacks.

 

Obviously even the US cant track them all day long.

 

“Their advantage is stealth,” said Waickwicz, head of the Fleet Anti-Submarine Warfare Command. “They can hover, sit on the bottom for long periods of time. They can sit as an ambush, or they can be out working in wolf-packs.”

[Guest IguanaKing]

This is news to some people? :megalol: OF COURSE they are much more difficult to track, and if they are used in their intended role they are fine. :D

[Groove]

Please read the above article written by US media and maybe rethink your sight of modern non-nuclear boats.

 

By threating US soil they must obviously travel to the US coast. And it seems that the navy is worried about not being able to detect them on their way from some other spot on the world to the American coast.

[Guest IguanaKing]

...and having submarines propelled by the same means helps the US how? Going dead and listening is about all anyone can do when they don't know where the submerged vessel is. Having a quieter sub may decrease the ambient noise levels and facilitate detection, but being able to hunt and kill them further out is what the US Navy has banked on. This means that any submerged vessel targeting the US has to run at a MUCH slower speed than flank to avoid detection...and with diesel/electric, time is the fire in which you burn. ;)

[p_o_d_2_2]

Once again: nuclear subs are loud. you cand turn off the cooling pumps. diesel / fuel cell are silent.

 

 

 

uhhh, nuclear subs are not loud. i read somewhere that ohio class boats are quieter than the water around them.

[D-Scythe]

Agreed. No idea where the idea that nuclear subs are loud comes from, but some of the quietest submarines (Ohio, Seawolf, Akula, etc.) are nuclear powered.

[Guest IguanaKing]

Heh...the point he made about the cooling pumps is almost identical to what I said about a nuclear submarine in port, in relation to all of this "they can't operate in shallow water because it'll clog the inlets to their cooling pumps" stuff. :D They are always in operation, even in port.

[GGTharos]

Nuke subs are loud compared to diesel subs, but 'loud' is very, very relative ;)

[SimFreak]

Nuke subs are loud compared to diesel subs, but 'loud' is very, very relative ;)

 

yep, diesel subs do not need cooling pumps...

[Groove]

Nuclear subs are LOUDER than Diesel subs. Better definition ?

[gundelgauk]

Ok, as long as submarines use some kind of propulsion and/or electrical systems, they will always be detectable (I'm not even talking about MAD sensors). You can even shut down the propulsion completely and still get sonar contacts because of the electrical systems on board. In the case of the German 212 this will likely be in the 50Hz range as this is the frequency they use for alternating voltage. So I think talking about any sub being virtually undetectable is a bit misguided.

 

As for nuclear subs being louder than say electrically powered ones - I'm no expert but my guess is that the nuclear reactor and the bigger size of these submarines require more mechanical systems (pumps and the like) and this could be the reason they generate more noise.

 

About the hydrogen cell technology, I personally find that very innovative. True, they have been in use for years but comparing that would be like saying "Why buy a BMW Z4? Otto engines have been in use for many years". AFAIK the Germans are rather big in this hydrogen cell technology. There are German cars available that use this technology if I recall correctly?

[D-Scythe]

Nuclear subs are LOUDER than Diesel subs. Better definition ?

 

And generally bigger fighters have a larger RCS. Does that mean all large fighters have large RCS signatures?

 

Get the idea?

[Groove]

And generally bigger fighters have a larger RCS. Does that mean all large fighters have large RCS signatures?

 

Get the idea?

 

Dude, comparing subs to fighters is a strange analogy. Nuclear subs are louder than diesel subs. Maybe in x years nuclear subs will be more silent that diesel - but not nowadays.