Why does the USA exclusively use nuclear propulsion for their submarines? Is one 2B USD Los Angeles class really that good as 400M USD AIP-equipped boats?
Why does the USA exclusively use nuclear propulsion for their submarines?
Why does the USA exclusively use nuclear propulsion for their submarines? Is one 2B USD Los Angeles class really that good as 400M USD AIP-equipped boats?
First off: explain your picture, OP
脂肪出来てるから、柔らかいのだ
Please lurk 18 years before posting.
no moar lurk for me!
my homie
doctrine
>boats
you answered your own question
Non-nuclear subs are fundamentally different than nuclear ones due to propulsion constraints. They're slow and have limited range. They're more like mobile minefields than the true hunter-killers that nuke subs are. You're not going to keep pace with an enemy surface group in a diesel sub.
The U.S. exclusively needs its subs VERY far from its shores and relies on them heavily for ship-killing. Non-nuclear subs only really make sense for the U.S. for things like UUVs.
So, whatever marginal advantages of stealth a Sterling engine-based AIP system has over a coolant-circulating, steam-powered nuclear reactor are rendered completely null tactically, since they'd rarely ever make it to torpedo range to begin with.
The enemy ships would mostly have to come to you, yes. Useful in a defensive position, not so useful when trying to conduct an offense.
That depends heavily on your specific context. Nuke boats are great if you want to operate on the other side of the globe, and want to have *some* capability to quickly reposition them on an operational scale. (This is of course a rather risky thing to do in a shooting war if your opponent has some halfway decent ASW around, because going fast both makes you easier to detect and degrades your own sensors.)
AIP boats are great if you plan to mostly operate in specific, limited areas (like straits or along major shipping routes) and relatively closer to home. IE, if you know that there's gonna be a target coming to you/your operational area eventually - or if your goal is straight-up area denial/deterrence.
Which one is better or worse hence very much depends on your larger-scale strategic situation and goals.
Are nuke boats in those roles significantly less effective, to the point of the USN missing out enough to warrant integrating a nonnuclear submarine fleet, though? What can an AIP sub fleet do that green-water frigates and air support can't?
The Swede sub couldn't even make the return trip with its own power. What the Gotland did in the training exercise was a more like a kamikaze attack.
>Non-nuclear subs only really make sense for the U.S. for things like UUVs.
How the frick do you control a uuv?
Program it to stay near the surface or surface periodically to recieve transmission?
Preplanned mission sets activated by VLF transmission?
Heavy use of AI?
Or do they just stay close to a fleet and act purely in a support role?
>How the frick do you control a uuv?
[OPSEC] [*redacted*]
no one knows really, the Navy is cutting back on surface unmanned vessels as well, drones are great for the sky and ok on land but whichever moron thought you should slap that shit on water with no easy way to repair it has never touched a boiler room before
nuclear powered deep fat friers
We're not allow to used.
>muh heathly food
>no fried food
Thanks Obama
what
day one of BRICS sonar technician training:
>proper english: royal navy vessel
>incomprehensible creole: USN vessel
Being at sea all the time you'd think they'd make sushi and sushimi with all that free fish around ?
>Is one 2B USD Los Angeles class really that good as 400M USD AIP-equipped boats?
For the US? Yeah, probably.
As well as the speed and range constraints mentioned by the other anon (although calling them mobile minefields is taking it a bit far) there is stealth - AIP subs still have to snorkel now and then to recharge their systems, combine that with their relatively slow speed and they're much easier to locate. They are quieter when running purely off batteries (or the Germs fuel cell AIP system iirc) but they can't keep that up for all that long.
They're a decent option for navies planning to operate close in to friendly shores but pretty shit for sea lane control.
You could argue that the USN may benefit from a fleet of cheaper AIP subs to be stationed around Japan, SK and Germany but given the cost of adding a radically new design to the sub fleet I reckon you'd lose more than you'd save.
There's also the manpower issue. The navy struggles for recruits anyway, better to go with fewer but more capable subs than try to play a numbers game with the chinks.
>snorkel
Modern AIP subs can go weeks without resurfacing.
Only if they seriously limit powe output. Iirc the Swedish AIP subs are limited to 5mph if they want to live up to their max endurance between snorkels.
Not sure how long they need to spend at the surface during each snorkel. If any anons have a good source for that Id appreciate it.
>how long they need to spend at the surface during each snorkel
To recharge batteries? Hours. Several hours. During which you are broadcasting your presence acoustically.
but with littoral combat, is that that big of a deal? if you aren't american and hellbent on keeping control of everywhere from guam to bahrain, of what use is spending five times as much to patrol a fraction of the area
Nuke boats are also much faster than diesels. Which is good strategically and tactically
Littoral combat outside your own harbor is the province of aircraft.
Travel any distance, and air breathing subs suck. It's a false economy.
>air-breathing subs su-ACK
>exercise
Opinion discarded
homosexual
Without covering any distance.
>los angeles class
>virginia class
>ohio class
>>>>>
do americans really?
naming ships after cities and states is lame
naming ships after people is even lamer
i suppose furry OC nomenclature is more fitting for dying empires, yeah
Return to fish names.
>ohio class
As a Southerner how scary Ohio can be.
if you intend to deploy across the entirety of the world like the usn does, then yes, nuclear is a necessity in terms of being able to deploy wherever you want whenever you want
They don't. What do you think those tic tack UFO drones are. Nuclear pulse propulsion. Controlled micro nuke bursts providing directional thrust.
Yes.