Diesel-electric subs.

Just how much trouble are modern day sub hunters having with conventional subs?

The U.S. navy have leased a Gotland class sub from Sweden to help solve problems of detecting them.

Been watching a repeat of ''Submariners'' an interesting account of the patrol of HMAS Rankin, a Collins class sub. The Collins class came in for a lot of flak early on, but plenty of dollars latter they've become very deadly.

Rankin before sailing to Japan, took on and torpedoed an ANZAC class frigate, then headed for the Rimpac war games, eager to emulate her sister HMAS Waller, who successfully stalked and "killed" a Los Angeles-class nuclear submarine without detection and took close-in photos of the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln through its periscope, demonstrating it could come within torpedo range without detection."

Rankin's mission was to pass through a choke point between two islands group guarded by The US guided missile destroyers USS O’Kane and USS Paul Hamilton, guided missile frigate USS Reuben James, nuclear submarine USS Key West, Destroyer Squadron 31, six Patrol Squadron anti-submarine P-3C Orion combat crews and Helicopter Anti-Submarine Squadron Light 37 united themselves against the Australian “Black Knight”.

If that wasn't hard enough, Rankin was ''painted'' from the start and had to shake of it's hunters, which it did, then turned into the hunter.

It shows an Arleigh Burke on the Rankins periscope, unaware it was there, Rankin fired it's torpedoes and escaped undetected.

It's only exercises, but it makes you wonder.

The US Navy described HMAS Rankin as “a formidable opponent”

 

nuclear subs are actually quite noisy, the problem is that you can't shut down the cooling system of the generator even if you are not doing anything.

Electric subs are also generally smaller giving them a smaller profile to spot.

But yes, Russian diesal electrics are much much harder to spot than russain nuclears, especially there reactors are pretty poor.

FNG

 

Undetected? I have read several accounts of the ASW portion of Operation Silent Fury in USN publications but they all report tracking the Rankin during the exercise. The only part of the account you relate that I agree with is the USN did indeed in public relations releases describe the Rankin as "a formidable opponent".

This quote is from Navy News( vol. 29 issue 35) regarding the Reuben James participation in Silent Fury:

It seems that every time a foreign power engages in a military training exercise with the US they come away convinced of their overwhelming superiority, even if that opinion isn't mutual.

 

Don't think my post mentions anything about myself, or the RAN, being ''convinced of their overwhelming superiority'' just your vivid imagination at work there I think.

Don't know if the DVD ''Submariners''has been released in the U. S. if it has I recommend that anyone interested in the silent service have a look at it, shows life on board a sub making a long voyage, and clearly shows what actually happened on camera, how Rankin evaded it's trackers and the film shot through the periscope showing an Arleigh Burke passing within torpedo range unaware that it's being tracked.

Are Navies having serious trouble detecting very quite diesel electric subs like Rankin and the new German super quite subs, the USN hiring the Swedish Gotland class and the recent Chinese sub surfacing along side a US carrier recently seems to suggest they have things to work on.

 

We are in agreement; the account in question certainly involves some vivid imagination, along with some wishful thinking

I would indeed be interested in seeing the DVD. Especially the part where one is able to tell from the video that they are not being tracked by passive sonar. How exactly did they accomplish that, one wonders?

You are correct in assuming that because the USN conducts training exercises proves beyond a doubt that they are sadly deficient in these areas. After all, why else woud they bother with expensive and time consuming activities like training?
I will certainly fire off a letter to the Navy Times correcting the falsehoods and outright lies that those sailors on the Reuben James and the other USN ships told regarding their tracking of the Rankin.
Scandalous, I say.

 

Let's discuss the pro's and con's of nuclear and conventional submarines.

Is it me or is the nuclear submarine a tad over rated ?

 

Okay. You start. List the pros and cons as you understand them.

 

Yep, get the DVD if you can, you won't be disappointed, I guarantee it.

I'm glad you agree with me that there seems to be a few problems in detecting very quite diesel electric subs, although I wouldn't go as far to say their sadly deficient.

And I'd save firing off a letter to the Navy Times about correcting the falsehoods and outright lies that those sailors on the Reuben James and the other USN ships told regarding their tracking of the Rankin.
As I posted the Rankin started the exercise being ''tagged'' and it's job was to try and break the track, and it shows how it did it, going dangerously close to shallow littorals, the fact that Rankin eluded 3 helos who'd hacked her before the start of the event says something significant about skills and training, then it shows the Rankin tracking the Burke and maneuvering into a torpedo attack.

Strike one for the silent service. :kill:

Interesting to note the capt is ex RN with 25 years in subs including nukes. His opinion is that the Collins are the best conventionals in the world.

 

Grieg and Anzac, please tone down the rhetoric. Debate is a fine thing, so long as it is done within proper limits. You two are getting a little too close to the limit in the tone and wording of your posts. Perhaps a little less sarcasm in the future might not be a bad idea, eh?

 

Okay. I'll try. But I must warn you that if I completely forswear sarcasm it is possible that I will be forced to post only blank lines and empty paragraphs in the future. Kinda like this:

I understand what you are saying but ______________________and also________________________what do you say about_____________________________do you really think_____________________________________________________and that is what I think.

 

Yeah, well, I know that you'll do your best, Grieg.

 

I hope you aren't being sarcastic when you say that( with a wink) Lest we forget though; one man's sarcasm is another man's irony.
Well, I guess we can forget it since I just made it up. But I like it, anyway .

 

...ROFL ....GRIEG !!!!

 

Grieg - I'm looking forward to seeing more of that in future...


Ok, nukes vs Diesel-electric:

Nukes: bigger, longer-ranged, ocean-going, no need to re-fuel or even surface much. Noisier

D-E: smaller, quieter, shorter-ranged and mostly used for coastal work. Need to surface (or at least snorkel) regularly. Not much cop at carrying ICBMs.

 

Diesels are also cheaper and require a smaller complement than a nuclear sub.

 

This subject requires some specialized knowledge and is complicated by the fact that virtually all details below the level of the very superficial are highly classified and little information is available in the public domain.

I will post some excerpts from similar discussions on forums related to this issue:

In this forum GF0012-aust an Australian who works as a defense professional in this area (and who understandably will only discuss certain issues and will provide no details not already in the public domain)
writes:

Kapitan writes:

GF0012-aust responds:

Another Kapitan post:

GF0012-aust's response:

more from kapitan:

and response:

 

more:

GF0012-aust replies:

more:

GF responds:

and in response to comments about the use of conventional subs against a CSF (carrier strike force):

GF responds:

 

We can come back to the military forums a little later.

A few points; It has been pointed out that the USN has leased a Gotland class submarine for training exercises with the implication that this is needed because the USN is unable to detect diesel subs. That is kind of like saying that because the USAF used F-5s or T-38s as aggressor training aircraft it proved that USAF fighters were unable to effectively counter the MIGs that the T-38s were used to simulate. As it happens the T-38/F-5 (or A-4) was a good match in several important ways(e.g size, performance envelope) to effectively simulate a MIG. The USN has no diesel subs in it's inventory by choice. It isn't as if they couldn't have them if they so desired.
It is convenient however to have a good quality diesel sub to use for training purposes since it is entirely possible that the SSNs of the future may face off against some unspecified country's diesel subs rather than the Soviet nuke subs that was the focus of training in earlier days (when there was still a USSR)

Those that state that SSNs are quite noisy are repeating myths IMO. Virtually nobody publishes such data in the public domain. The only time I saw a source for something published like that was from about 10 years ago in Stefanik: Strategic ASW and Naval Strategy where broadband numbers were published and the quietest submarines in the world (passive sonar) were Los Angeles class 688is and Ohio class Trident boomers. This was prior to the SeaWolf and Virginia class which are presumably significantly stealthier.

Other factors that are equally important is that you might be in a totally silent sub (stationary, and of limited value in that state) but if you don't have the most advanced passive and active sonar with the very latest computer (hardware and software) analysis and very highly trained operators to detect your adversary, what are you going to accomplish?


Joe Buff, a bestselling author(of fiction) on the subject is considered to very knowledgable when it comes to subs and ASW and has published articles in THE SUBMARINE REVIEW, a professional magazine for the submarine community as well as numerous essays for Military.com.

Here is a link to an article called Diesel Downside.

Pretty interesting stuff if one is interested in subs and sub warfare.

http://www.joebuff.com/essay77.htm

 

Oh yeah I forgot to mention that even if (big if) it happened as stated you should be aware that the Collins class Rankin would have tracked the Burke with:

US supplied Raytheon combat control system:

And has she fired on her she would have fired;

either a US supplied Gould mk 48 mod 4 torpedo, or a US supplied Boeing Sub Harpoon anti-ship missile.

If she missed and had to evade:

she could use her US supplied EDO ES-5600 ESM countermeasures system.

I think there are a few genuine Australians on board though and it just may be that they desire to train with the USN as much as vice versa

 

The bloke your quoting, gf0012-aust also goes on to say........

In the last 2 years, since the sig reduction changes have been made, and since hull revisions were made, the Collins have "sunk" a 688i, a number of CVN's, some AB-II's and managed to avoid a dedicated ASW task force at the last RIMPAC involving 5 skimmers and 2 fixed wing efforts tooling around in Orions. In fact, the Collins was inside the 12 mile limit and was still unable to be found in a "known grid" in the wargame area. All this was in an unassisted fashion. The USN did not provide assisted shots - especially with the most recent CVN and 688I slots. They were sunk in open, unfettered competition without noisemakers and modified rules to assist the attackers. It would pay to look for some recent USN articles as personally, I wouldn't quote Aust'n references anyway.
[And they took out a Burke to boot]

The Collins class boats, mainly because of the quality of their crews, have proved to be among the most capable diesel-electric subs in the world. This is known because Collins class boats often train with U.S. Navy ships and aircraft, and usually come out ahead.

Four-star admiral, Gary Roughead says ''we continue to operate with, and hopefully learn from the RAN submariners and techs onboard/and off the Collins class boats.

The growth of quieter diesel boats, especially those belonging to countries not aligned with the United States, has concerned U.S. military officials hence the lease of Gotland.
No doubt the USN will iron out any shortcomings.

Are there any Aussies on the boat? well, there was a bloke from Kentucky who is now an Aussie - he was ex USN for 12 years and decided to emigrate.