Speaking of Diesel-Electric subs I just toured the USS Blueback, ssn 591 here in Portland, OR.  Commissioned in 1959 it was the US' last Diesel boat.

 

We could learn a thing or two about diesel subs form the Lada to the German type 212 with the new AIP technologies.

 

We have a lot of missions that a type 212 could fulfill all around the world.  Cheaper by a factor of 4 or 5 to build and operate (2,4 billion vs 500 million, 125 crew vs 27 crew).  

 

Would you rather have 1 Virginia protecting the panama canal, for example, or 4 type 212s.  Or Pearl harbor, or off Japan, keeping an eye on North Korea, etc.  2 on station, one headed to or from port, one in port - definitely superior protection.

 

I would trade a Virginia for 4 type 212's in and around the Straits of Hormuz, for example too.  Sure they don't carry a butt-load of tomahawks, but they can carry mines.  And they are a helluva lot smaller for sneaking around.

 

Clearly we need Virginias.  Type 212's can't keep up with carrier groups or do all of the missions the nukes can. 

 

 

Bigger isn't always better.  But more usually is! 

All of these assume you have local bases or tenders to operate from. South Korea and Japan operate conventional submarines in their waters already, why should the US also?

What would the US, the rest of the Coalition, or the Gulf states (beside Iran) want with mines in the Straits of Hormuz? They are trying to keep them from being there!