I love CIWS. I want CIWS on my front lawn. I wanna donate 100 CIWS to Ukraine so that CIWS can shred up Russians. Give me CIWS to use on orcas, I wanna hunt seagulls with CIWS. I wanna be a vtuber with CIWS as my character model. I want to conceal carry CIWS in my car.
But even the role is meant to be what frigate is, its just decided to call them corvettes. It even has a helipad and some kind of hangar for helicopters.
How "done" do you think submarine technology is? Like not including the computers and sensors, is the basic design of the SSN/SSBN pretty much done and we'll just keep replacing the ones we have with more or less the same thing from now on? Or do you think there's something better just around the corner? What about size? Are they as big as they'll ever be or will they get bigger? If there was an arms race on to see who could build the best submarine the most, is that it?
Because surface ships are done, the basic design of a destroyer or aircraft carrier will still be the basic design of destroyers and aircraft carriers a thousand years from now.
this is a micro-UUV that can be deployed to act as active sonar and fit in the profile of a shark or dolphin with simple shape masking, essentially untrackable unless they want to blow up anything over a few feet long in a dozen mile radius
it doesn't matter what your submarine's performance profile is like as long as it has: >enough stealth capability to hang around with the engines off and not get spotted >(1) good torpedo >a stowage for UUV buoys and sonar mimics
submarines are going to be in an arms race against active detection as attritable unmanned systems enter service, which is part of why the US Navy is deliberately sabotaging procurement efforts in order to rush the implementation of the UUV/USV force
>US Navy is deliberately sabotaging procurement efforts
You must be joking. The USN has packed every shipyard capable of building a Virginia Block V with orders for the next ten years.
They ALSO want to build a new submarine but can't because they don't have a drydock to do it.
Which is kind of my point, is building Virginia's the right move or is there something better to spam? Like if we're going to be building a completely different hull configuration in 30 years time, why don't we just figure out what that's going to be and build it now?
>Virginia Block V
I'm talking about surface vessels, SSN acquisition is fine and isn't under the same three-way pressures, part of the scuttle of the surface navy is because the USN thinks that but can't actually gut SSN funds because congress knows that subs are a priority for nuclear security
if you can't kill the subs, and you still want to transition, but no one is going to fund your unmanned vessel empire, the surface navy must shrink to defer funds, and it has to be done in a way that the funds are held hostage and it appears the UUVs/USVs are the "cheapest" option
it's a great, patriotic effort, just very stupid too
>Virginia Block V
I'm talking about surface vessels, SSN acquisition is fine and isn't under the same three-way pressures, part of the scuttle of the surface navy is because the USN thinks that but can't actually gut SSN funds because congress knows that subs are a priority for nuclear security
if you can't kill the subs, and you still want to transition, but no one is going to fund your unmanned vessel empire, the surface navy must shrink to defer funds, and it has to be done in a way that the funds are held hostage and it appears the UUVs/USVs are the "cheapest" option
it's a great, patriotic effort, just very stupid too
I definitely agree with the stupid part. American procurement needs a COMPLETE overhaul.
I mean holy shit from the heights of the 50s and 60s with the establishment of DARPA to today where the only thing that isn't incompetent is the rorts.
2 years ago
Anonymous
I just don't know why congress hasn't noticed: >every year the US Navy drops a new force design report >the total number of manned ships goes up, even though the # actually manufactured that fiscal year went down >the proposed number and average size of unmanned ships rises with every force design report
the year is 2045, congress says "373 and 150 unmanned," the Navy reveals that it's all a big ruse and in fact the goal was 523 unmanned all along and there are approximately zero sailors on payroll (their wages all went to making more USV)
2 years ago
Anonymous
>The entire USN is controlled by one fat frick with an X-box controller and his AI anime waifu
Fund it. Fund it now.
2 years ago
Anonymous
What if he's a scrub? There should at least be two of them
>CnC was a training sim all along
2 years ago
Anonymous
>What if he's a scrub?
What if I was that scrub?
2 years ago
Anonymous
Why does the US military keep trying to build Skynet? They must have seen the movies.
South Korea is already building arsenal ships for its own navy.
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2021/12/latest-details-on-south-koreas-arsenal-ship-project/
> 5,000 tons arsenal ships by the late 2020s, equipped with over 80 land attack cruise missiles
Wow a whole 80?
Never mind a Burke class destroyer can carry a maximum of 96.
The standard optimal shape of submarines changed for the USN recently. To be fair other nations had already made the change and the US was catching up.
Round cross section is the only non-stupid design.
If you mean teardrop vs cylindrical, straight cylinders like the 688s were easier and less expensive to prefab.
2 years ago
Anonymous
You’re out of date and the USN will be incorporating the shape changes of the RN in future designs.
Here me out here.
Plane goes fast because it goes through air
Subs go slow because it goes through water.
Surface ships should go faster than subs since it's only partially in the water.
In post-war years subs have reached surface ship speeds somehow through technology.
Is it possible to massively increase the speed of surface ships in the future? Something like 100+ knots DDs and carriers. Would allow them to dodge ballistic missiles easier.
There's a whole bunch of other factors in the speed of surface ships, faster than 35kts and wind resistance is actually a greater source of drag than water resistance. You've also got things like hull speed, stability, etc.
The math of surface ship design is cool, I recommend it to big brains looking for something to study to pass the time. It's so much more fun that rocket science.
But most of that does not apply to a submarine, which is why submarines go faster underwater than on the surface. So I can look at the physics of a surface ship and say "right, so this is more or less what a ship of X type and Y size is going to look like in 100 years time" but I can't say that with submarines, I have no idea if the big black dildo design is the best, or if it's the Roman Galley to IJS Yamato.
There's an idea in the back of my head that goes something along the lines of "good for a plane = good for a submarine" since the physics is mostly the same. But the speed of sound in water is five times the speed of sound in air, so a high subsonic submarine is going at 1200m/s or so, ~4000kph or ~2000kts. And what I'm wondering here is - is that just a case of more powerful engines or am I missing something?
Anyone have more photos of submarines just barely visible in water or just below the surface? Or proper search terms to find them?
I love these kinds of photos but there seem to be very few of them, or I'm too moronic to find them.
That ship isn't. That ship is typical of the problems in USN procurement of the last 30 years.
What they actually needed was an OPV with minsweeping capability.
What everyone thought they were building was a frigate packed into a corvette.
What they got was useless frankenship that is bad at everything and a huge bill for their trouble.
Picrel is better in every way despite being 60 years old.
I have to get ready for work but last year I was doing Operation Projection and Operation Neon and whenever we were leaving whatever NATO ship we sailed with we would do these drive bys and wave goodbye to each other.
I have about 10 minutes before I need to start driving.
What's some stuff you want to know about?
Just to get it out of the way I'm in Canada Royal Navy. I deployed in 2020 and 2021. I'm a sonar tech although my training to get to this point required me to work on all the weapon systems on ship.
I have 300 sea days.
Shit I missed this. What’s Canada’s navy like, I know at the macro level it seems to have been mismanaged and degraded over the last few decades (hopefully that is being turned around), but what’s it like as a serving sailor? When you deploy with other nations do you get to meets in person or do you simply practice operating together in your separate ships companies?
But really I’m happy with any stories. Just remember, shit dits sink ships.
It's cool I got off work early and this thread isn't dead yet. > but what’s it like as a serving sailor?
When it's good it's really goddamn good but when it's bad it fricking sucks. It's extremely rare that things are just okay. When alongside my trade is usually pretty busy because all of our equipment is off so we can work on it properly and it is usually pretty busy.
While at sea since all my equipment is on and running all I do is just do rounds on it and if there's any maintenance that needs to be done I have to go through the chain of command in order to have them know what capabilities we're losing. Most of the busy times are when we're coming in or leaving ports since we have to load all the weapons then. And once in port we go and do some quick maintenance before getting secured.
>When you deploy with other nations do you get to meets in person or do you simply practice operating together in your separate ships companies?
I got stuck doing the covid sail in 2020 so we weren't allowed to leave our ship/jetty so for that during RIMPAC we didn't get to meet anyone but from what I've heard from others you normally get to go around to all the other ships and hang out with the other nations.
In 2021 because of covid no country would let us in so we were stuck to the ship/jetty unless it was an American base then we were confined to the base. I got to hang out with a lot of Americans then. Really fun group of guys I still talk to a few of them now.
I'll make another post to greentext a story so I don't hit the text limit.
>When sailing in the South Sea the Chinese always has a warship following us. >We're about to come into port the next day so we're doing a small arms shoot on the flight deck for the force protection >I go up to the bridge to go on helm and the Officer of the Watch(OOW) is talking to the Chinese to let them know to keep away from our port side since we're going to be shooting rifles that way >Chinese acknowledges and tells us they'll keep away from our port side >The gunners decided to do maintenance on the 57mm that day too and the Operations Room Officer didn't tell the OOW >As soon as the OOW was done talking to the Chinese the 57mm aims at the port side >The Chinese instantly calls over the radio yelling at us about our gun and their gun started pointing at us. >OOW is now talking with their OOW trying to sort it all out >Captain comes up to the bridge now to talk to the Chinese to calm them down so we don't get shot
It was an interesting hour up on the helm
2 years ago
Anonymous
Since it's the canadian navy, do you have mandarin-speakers on board? If so do you use them to communicate with the chinese?
2 years ago
Anonymous
We don't have a dedicated person on board to speak it. I can't remember if anyone on the 2021 sail could speak it but on the 2020 sail there was a guy that could. The only time we used him though was during some drills before the deployment. We still just used English when communicating with the Chinese.
>When sailing in the South Sea the Chinese always has a warship following us. >We're about to come into port the next day so we're doing a small arms shoot on the flight deck for the force protection >I go up to the bridge to go on helm and the Officer of the Watch(OOW) is talking to the Chinese to let them know to keep away from our port side since we're going to be shooting rifles that way >Chinese acknowledges and tells us they'll keep away from our port side >The gunners decided to do maintenance on the 57mm that day too and the Operations Room Officer didn't tell the OOW >As soon as the OOW was done talking to the Chinese the 57mm aims at the port side >The Chinese instantly calls over the radio yelling at us about our gun and their gun started pointing at us. >OOW is now talking with their OOW trying to sort it all out >Captain comes up to the bridge now to talk to the Chinese to calm them down so we don't get shot
It was an interesting hour up on the helm
I miss cannons being used. Tired of this single gun on every fricking ship and im tired of missiles. I cant wait til our ship mounted lasers are wide spread enough to negate missiles all together
>refit USS Missouri
Nah.
Need a new hull, that's even bigger, and has even more guns.
Disclaimer: This is not a battleship, this an artillery ship (amongst other things), as the purpose of the guns is NSFS and not as an anti-ship weapon.
But yeah, 12-16 300mm/L150 guns with a rate of fire of maybe 6 RPM per barrel (1 round per 10 seconds) would effectively provide an artillery battalion's worth of indirect fire support at ranges of up to 100-150kms inland. With scramjet assisted projectiles (which are possible at this caliber) you'd be talking effectively unlimited range. True strategic artillery without all the problems of nuclear weapons and a reasonably low cost per round.
>big stick
i see your a Roosevelt enthusiast. i like the idea of an artillery ship but it doesnt scratch my itch of ships sinking each other with high velocity projectiles
sailors more like gaylors lmao
This. Its a historical fact that a navy has never been an achievable treat to win any war.
all im saying is dude sailors have sex with each other
Hot quizz on navy ships based on stats:
Corvette or Frigate?
- displacement 3,9ktons
- length 115m
- beam 16m
- draught 5m
Armament:
- 1x57mm gun
- 8xsurface-to-surface missile
- 8x32 surface-to-air missile
- torpedoes
- 2x remote weapons system
Frigate
what's a "remote weapons system"
moron's name for a CIWS
I love CIWS. I want CIWS on my front lawn. I wanna donate 100 CIWS to Ukraine so that CIWS can shred up Russians. Give me CIWS to use on orcas, I wanna hunt seagulls with CIWS. I wanna be a vtuber with CIWS as my character model. I want to conceal carry CIWS in my car.
>I wanna hunt seagulls withCIWS
Me too buddy, me too
Ngl the sound of these things makes me rock hard
CIWS autism. I'd theorized it was possible but never actually seen it before today.
CIWS go brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
not all RWS are CIWS, but all CIWS are RWS
>classifying ships by size not role
Ngmi
But even the role is meant to be what frigate is, its just decided to call them corvettes. It even has a helipad and some kind of hangar for helicopters.
sloop
These names became meaningless after the age of sail.
obviously it's a black-project submarine aa cruiser.
3900 tons displacement?? Why, that's an impressively sized destroyer leader, obviously.
Pohjanmaa-class corvette?
But submarines...
How "done" do you think submarine technology is? Like not including the computers and sensors, is the basic design of the SSN/SSBN pretty much done and we'll just keep replacing the ones we have with more or less the same thing from now on? Or do you think there's something better just around the corner? What about size? Are they as big as they'll ever be or will they get bigger? If there was an arms race on to see who could build the best submarine the most, is that it?
Because surface ships are done, the basic design of a destroyer or aircraft carrier will still be the basic design of destroyers and aircraft carriers a thousand years from now.
this is a micro-UUV that can be deployed to act as active sonar and fit in the profile of a shark or dolphin with simple shape masking, essentially untrackable unless they want to blow up anything over a few feet long in a dozen mile radius
it doesn't matter what your submarine's performance profile is like as long as it has:
>enough stealth capability to hang around with the engines off and not get spotted
>(1) good torpedo
>a stowage for UUV buoys and sonar mimics
submarines are going to be in an arms race against active detection as attritable unmanned systems enter service, which is part of why the US Navy is deliberately sabotaging procurement efforts in order to rush the implementation of the UUV/USV force
>US Navy is deliberately sabotaging procurement efforts
You must be joking. The USN has packed every shipyard capable of building a Virginia Block V with orders for the next ten years.
They ALSO want to build a new submarine but can't because they don't have a drydock to do it.
Which is kind of my point, is building Virginia's the right move or is there something better to spam? Like if we're going to be building a completely different hull configuration in 30 years time, why don't we just figure out what that's going to be and build it now?
>Virginia Block V
I'm talking about surface vessels, SSN acquisition is fine and isn't under the same three-way pressures, part of the scuttle of the surface navy is because the USN thinks that but can't actually gut SSN funds because congress knows that subs are a priority for nuclear security
if you can't kill the subs, and you still want to transition, but no one is going to fund your unmanned vessel empire, the surface navy must shrink to defer funds, and it has to be done in a way that the funds are held hostage and it appears the UUVs/USVs are the "cheapest" option
it's a great, patriotic effort, just very stupid too
>personal carry torpedoes
Someone posted in another thread that the next big thing will essentially be submarine arsenal ships. SSGNs that act as mobile Tomahawk batteries.
That was me actually. It's pretty much what the Virginia Block V is.
Orrrrrrrrrr Supercavitation is a mirage and just more powerful hydrojets are the way to go.
>grug burn more log
>grug go faster
If it aint broke...
I definitely agree with the stupid part. American procurement needs a COMPLETE overhaul.
I mean holy shit from the heights of the 50s and 60s with the establishment of DARPA to today where the only thing that isn't incompetent is the rorts.
I just don't know why congress hasn't noticed:
>every year the US Navy drops a new force design report
>the total number of manned ships goes up, even though the # actually manufactured that fiscal year went down
>the proposed number and average size of unmanned ships rises with every force design report
the year is 2045, congress says "373 and 150 unmanned," the Navy reveals that it's all a big ruse and in fact the goal was 523 unmanned all along and there are approximately zero sailors on payroll (their wages all went to making more USV)
>The entire USN is controlled by one fat frick with an X-box controller and his AI anime waifu
Fund it. Fund it now.
What if he's a scrub? There should at least be two of them
>CnC was a training sim all along
>What if he's a scrub?
What if I was that scrub?
Why does the US military keep trying to build Skynet? They must have seen the movies.
South Korea is already building arsenal ships for its own navy.
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2021/12/latest-details-on-south-koreas-arsenal-ship-project/
> 5,000 tons arsenal ships by the late 2020s, equipped with over 80 land attack cruise missiles
Wow a whole 80?
Never mind a Burke class destroyer can carry a maximum of 96.
>Wow a whole 80?
It can probably carry other missiles too (anti-ship, anti-air, etc.)
Yeah by swapping out one of the 80.
5,000 tonnes is not a big ship. This isn't a terrible idea, but it's hardly the infamous arsenal ship.
The Burke, at 10,000 tonnes, also carries Harpoons, SeaRAMs, VL-ASROCs, it's got a 5" gun and carries two helicopters.
>done
still working on supercavitating subs tho. hard to say where the intersection is with tictacs...
The standard optimal shape of submarines changed for the USN recently. To be fair other nations had already made the change and the US was catching up.
QRD?
More tear drop less round.
Round cross section is the only non-stupid design.
If you mean teardrop vs cylindrical, straight cylinders like the 688s were easier and less expensive to prefab.
You’re out of date and the USN will be incorporating the shape changes of the RN in future designs.
Here me out here.
Plane goes fast because it goes through air
Subs go slow because it goes through water.
Surface ships should go faster than subs since it's only partially in the water.
In post-war years subs have reached surface ship speeds somehow through technology.
Is it possible to massively increase the speed of surface ships in the future? Something like 100+ knots DDs and carriers. Would allow them to dodge ballistic missiles easier.
Drag goes up by the square of velocity, so no.
Very large hydrofoils
There's a whole bunch of other factors in the speed of surface ships, faster than 35kts and wind resistance is actually a greater source of drag than water resistance. You've also got things like hull speed, stability, etc.
The math of surface ship design is cool, I recommend it to big brains looking for something to study to pass the time. It's so much more fun that rocket science.
But most of that does not apply to a submarine, which is why submarines go faster underwater than on the surface. So I can look at the physics of a surface ship and say "right, so this is more or less what a ship of X type and Y size is going to look like in 100 years time" but I can't say that with submarines, I have no idea if the big black dildo design is the best, or if it's the Roman Galley to IJS Yamato.
There's an idea in the back of my head that goes something along the lines of "good for a plane = good for a submarine" since the physics is mostly the same. But the speed of sound in water is five times the speed of sound in air, so a high subsonic submarine is going at 1200m/s or so, ~4000kph or ~2000kts. And what I'm wondering here is - is that just a case of more powerful engines or am I missing something?
...are cooler!
That photo is terrifying
Anyone have more photos of submarines just barely visible in water or just below the surface? Or proper search terms to find them?
I love these kinds of photos but there seem to be very few of them, or I'm too moronic to find them.
I've founded them by googling "submarine submerged" and then browsing the similar images
That ship isn't. That ship is typical of the problems in USN procurement of the last 30 years.
What they actually needed was an OPV with minsweeping capability.
What everyone thought they were building was a frigate packed into a corvette.
What they got was useless frankenship that is bad at everything and a huge bill for their trouble.
Picrel is better in every way despite being 60 years old.
Naval combat and tactics always seemed very simple compared to the ground counterpart. Thoughts?
*autist trigger warning*
How come women cannot fathom a man's love for boats?
All ships are female and females hate each other.
truth
Best results are achieved by disguising your carrier as an iceberg.
Let's go skiing!
The RN can't afford skis and you know it.
Kino pic related.
Kino plan stupid plan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Habakkuk
I have to get ready for work but last year I was doing Operation Projection and Operation Neon and whenever we were leaving whatever NATO ship we sailed with we would do these drive bys and wave goodbye to each other.
I only have one picture from it on my computer.
Great pic, thanks anon. Come back and give us some dits later please.
I have about 10 minutes before I need to start driving.
What's some stuff you want to know about?
Just to get it out of the way I'm in Canada Royal Navy. I deployed in 2020 and 2021. I'm a sonar tech although my training to get to this point required me to work on all the weapon systems on ship.
I have 300 sea days.
Shit I missed this. What’s Canada’s navy like, I know at the macro level it seems to have been mismanaged and degraded over the last few decades (hopefully that is being turned around), but what’s it like as a serving sailor? When you deploy with other nations do you get to meets in person or do you simply practice operating together in your separate ships companies?
But really I’m happy with any stories. Just remember, shit dits sink ships.
It's cool I got off work early and this thread isn't dead yet.
> but what’s it like as a serving sailor?
When it's good it's really goddamn good but when it's bad it fricking sucks. It's extremely rare that things are just okay. When alongside my trade is usually pretty busy because all of our equipment is off so we can work on it properly and it is usually pretty busy.
While at sea since all my equipment is on and running all I do is just do rounds on it and if there's any maintenance that needs to be done I have to go through the chain of command in order to have them know what capabilities we're losing. Most of the busy times are when we're coming in or leaving ports since we have to load all the weapons then. And once in port we go and do some quick maintenance before getting secured.
>When you deploy with other nations do you get to meets in person or do you simply practice operating together in your separate ships companies?
I got stuck doing the covid sail in 2020 so we weren't allowed to leave our ship/jetty so for that during RIMPAC we didn't get to meet anyone but from what I've heard from others you normally get to go around to all the other ships and hang out with the other nations.
In 2021 because of covid no country would let us in so we were stuck to the ship/jetty unless it was an American base then we were confined to the base. I got to hang out with a lot of Americans then. Really fun group of guys I still talk to a few of them now.
I'll make another post to greentext a story so I don't hit the text limit.
>When sailing in the South Sea the Chinese always has a warship following us.
>We're about to come into port the next day so we're doing a small arms shoot on the flight deck for the force protection
>I go up to the bridge to go on helm and the Officer of the Watch(OOW) is talking to the Chinese to let them know to keep away from our port side since we're going to be shooting rifles that way
>Chinese acknowledges and tells us they'll keep away from our port side
>The gunners decided to do maintenance on the 57mm that day too and the Operations Room Officer didn't tell the OOW
>As soon as the OOW was done talking to the Chinese the 57mm aims at the port side
>The Chinese instantly calls over the radio yelling at us about our gun and their gun started pointing at us.
>OOW is now talking with their OOW trying to sort it all out
>Captain comes up to the bridge now to talk to the Chinese to calm them down so we don't get shot
It was an interesting hour up on the helm
Since it's the canadian navy, do you have mandarin-speakers on board? If so do you use them to communicate with the chinese?
We don't have a dedicated person on board to speak it. I can't remember if anyone on the 2021 sail could speak it but on the 2020 sail there was a guy that could. The only time we used him though was during some drills before the deployment. We still just used English when communicating with the Chinese.
Thanks bro. I really appreciate it.
You count your sea days?
Yeah you get medals depending on the days at sea.
It goes 185 for the first one then 720, and so on
I hope someday we can see a photo of CdG (or the next French carrier), a QE, a Ford, and perhaps an Izumo together.
Is that peashooter at the front the only weapon on that entire ship?
I miss cannons being used. Tired of this single gun on every fricking ship and im tired of missiles. I cant wait til our ship mounted lasers are wide spread enough to negate missiles all together
the last time we'll ever get kino like this
I haven't lost hope.
dont give me hope, CLG refit USS Missouri for another round would be fun
>refit USS Missouri
Nah.
Need a new hull, that's even bigger, and has even more guns.
Disclaimer: This is not a battleship, this an artillery ship (amongst other things), as the purpose of the guns is NSFS and not as an anti-ship weapon.
But yeah, 12-16 300mm/L150 guns with a rate of fire of maybe 6 RPM per barrel (1 round per 10 seconds) would effectively provide an artillery battalion's worth of indirect fire support at ranges of up to 100-150kms inland. With scramjet assisted projectiles (which are possible at this caliber) you'd be talking effectively unlimited range. True strategic artillery without all the problems of nuclear weapons and a reasonably low cost per round.
I call it the big stick.
>big stick
i see your a Roosevelt enthusiast. i like the idea of an artillery ship but it doesnt scratch my itch of ships sinking each other with high velocity projectiles
You might want to check out this thread.
Because it absolutely scratches my itch of pummeling the girls who wouldn't date me in high school.
>Because it absolutely scratches my itch of pummeling an aggressive peer adversary.
ftfm
Fricking autocorrect.
>My favorite branch of every military on earth is the Navy.
It would be, you flaming homo