>There are two types of ships: submarines and targets
Is this true or just bubblehead braggadocio? Would submarines dominate a modern, large scale naval conflict? They've already proven their worth in WWII and the Falklands.
>There are two types of ships: submarines and targets
One of my instructors was an XO on a Skipjack and Permits and he loved to say that.
The reality is that our Submarines are already in place ready to strike at a moments notice so if a war starts they immediately can go to work.
Bubblehead BS. Destroyers carry torpedoes just to dunk on the sub's attempts to sink them and carriers have dozens of aircraft that make live very difficult for them when their existence is known.
You've obviously never heard about that time a swedish submarine "sunk" an entire us carriergroup during wargames
those exercises delectably reduce the sonar and ASW abilities of both sides to hide the limits of the tech.
Deliberately*
I swear I can english
No, you've been found out.
To the concentration camp wth you.
That was close to 15 years ago and the U.S. leased the sub to understand what happened and what was capable of.
That boat was in the right place at the right time, in the abnormal conditions of an exercise.
Which is the best any non-nuclear powered sub can hope to achieve.
>Which is the best any non-nuclear powered sub can hope to achieve.
nice qualifier.
luckily none of our enemies have those.
hey, I didn’t bring it up
US adversaries don't have diesel subs?
Pretty sure an Australian sub sent as token OPFOR did the exact same thing.
its more a whoever shoots first is going to get a kill thing. Well maybe. A CVN might be able to tank a single torp but i have a feeling that any sub captain worth the gold paint on his rank is going to fire a brace of torps at something that large. once the shooting starts sonar is going to be a mess on both sides since you know torpedoes are loud and VLS launches are even louder
They should design a torpedo that just floats out of the tube and sits there giving the sub time to change position
I bet the current guidance systems are more than good enough for it to basically act like a loitering munition, especially if you give it targets before leaving it
I'm willing to bet there's currently torpedo technology to do just that, and also dive and hit precisely under the keel instead of going at a straight line at a certain depth like WWII. Or not, maybe they just banked on the fact that if it came to that they could launch a nuke at a carrier group if it came to that.
>There are two types of ships: submarines and targets
>Pic related : detects your submarine
Heh, nothing personal
J-20 food
It concerns me how much reliance is placed on hunter submarines and their ability to target other subs when sub v. sub combat has only happened once before in history.
Isn't it mostly asw helicopters these days?
depends.
your CSG isn't going to hunt SSBNs.
that's for hunter subs.
Correct, but that's because if the enemy sub wants to frick around in the middle of nowhere and maybe sink some oilers, it's not worth a CSG chasing it. Modern destroyers and cruisers carry helicopters for ASW, and there's a reason Japan's totally not F-35 carriers were larping as ASW helicopter carriers before they stopped trying to pretend.
> sub v. sub combat has only happened once before in history
Bullshit. Lrn 2 history.
Sorry. Completely submerged combat has only happened once.
I will admit plenty of subs got sniped while surfaced. But this has become less of a point as underwater loiter times have increased, only making subsurface combat more likely.
SSNs are the premiere sub hunters of the ocean and have been for a long time for good reason. It's not WW2 anymore.
Because only boats can follow boats in peace time, you moron, while ASW's job is not to kill the enemy subs but to deny them from operating in or passing through an area.
>Because only boats can follow boats in peace time
dumb shit, that's not even one quarter the story
it's because subs combine both the best ASW sensors in the water AND the best stealth, you couldn't ask for a better ASW platform
that's why the primary ASW-killer since at least the Cold War is actually another sub
>Main targets would be shipping vessels
Good way to get everyone pissed at you
Once again, you're too hung up on sinking the other guy's sub, which doesn't matter for anything but SSBNs. If your convoys and navy can cross the ocean unmolested, the ocean bed could be fricking made of enemy boats and it doesn't matter. Helicopter and aviation based ASW is far better at area denial because they can cover a far broader area in a short time without blowing their own stealth and making themselves a target.
Bud, the Battle of the Atlantic is over, tech has moved on
Subs can and will attack the warships themselves, they're not just there to sink convoys and run away, they are the premiere anti-submarine AND anti-ship assets of any navy that doesn't have ten carrier groups to throw around
you think subs don't have towed arrays?
>it's because subs combine both the best ASW sensors in the water AND the best stealth,
SURTASS LFA says hi.
Depends. America is pretty much the only nation that has so many fixed arrays, SURTASS/Towed Array equipped vessels and dedicated subhunter planes they can actually easily track a Russian or Chinese SS(G/B)N without necessarily sending their own sub. The Chinese are trying to make the SCS their own personal fortress in that regard but as long as you respect international waters you can't technically do any anything. Why do you think there's still Russian AGIs parked offshore of Norfolk and Pearl Harbor?
It's much easier for a boat to notice that it has a surface warship tailing it, and much more openly aggressive to do so, then to have a SSN do it. Keeping track of the number of subs coming and going from harbor isn't the same as trying to follow them, especially if you're a Russian boomer who lives under the polar cap the few times a year you leave port. Peace time sub chasing with a surface warship isn't a question of capability but of diplomacy 95% of the time and having sub chase sub is much less provocative since the game has been played for so long, as well as few nations want to come out and admit how well they can track enemy subs just for the points of saying "your warship was following mine :(" whereas doing that with a surface ship doesn't reveal any capabilities.
Flyovers and passive acoustic tracking isn't technically aggressive 😉
But yeah, the best way to track a sub is with another sub.
Playing "I'm not touching you!" is for irrelevant third world nations that need propaganda victories, which is why it still makes the news, ever so briefly, whenever a Russian or Chinese warship shadowed someone doing a FONOP, whereas a functional military doesn't want to do anything that would accidentally start cause shooting as long as everyone is playing by the rules.
P I N G
I
N
G
The dolphin frickboy fears the active sonar.
Hitler found at the hard way that putting all your stats into subs doesn’t work against the US and UK navies
survivorship bias.
odds weren't that one-sided.
it almost worked.
Japs performance in the end vindicated 'the French' approach. With their torp advantage they were better served by extensive commerce raiding across the entire Pacific + Indian Ocean. They're just slow with less endurance fuel wise until nuclear engines came along, so surface ships to dick on other surface ships is more economical despite the risks. War requires energy, and cinching off sea commerce is a clincher.
>Would submarines dominate a modern, large scale naval conflict?
It seems like the kill ratio on both sides would be super high.
Assuming things don't immediately go nuclear though, next steps after subs knocking each other out is likely just an insane shitton of mines, since they are much cheaper as an area denial weapon platform.
Deploying dozens to hundreds of mines per patrol boat trip at a low cost seems way more effective and easier to replace losses on than extremely long lead time sub replacement, and high cost sub weapons.
Main targets would be shipping vessels rather than warships at that phase of war.
but again, nukes, so who fricking knows.
Submarines will be absolutely OP in US & PRC fleets that have the stealth aircraft and rangy missiles to snipe ASW aircraft and ships.
Yes, but if the sub fires anything off, it's not making it home.
No boat, only missile now.
Yes, it's true. Modern diesel electric submarines are a nightmare for surface ships. Luckily, Western countries have the best ones.