Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Surface Forces Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Submersible ASW escort - half frigate, half submarine
Iano    8/20/2005 6:43:31 AM
Does anyone think there is merit in a class of ship that blurs the distinction between surface ship and submarine? Such a ship I could operate largely on the surface, allowing it to use its point air defence missiles and anti shipping missiles, perhaps it would even mount a gun, although I see this being much less suited, except perhaps for Goalkeeper/Sea RAM CIWSs. Then when it was required to prosecute an attack on a submarine (detected from afar with a variable-depth towed-array sonar, bow & flank sonar and datalinks to other sensors) it would be able to slip below the waves, it would not be as fast or as deep as the submarines in use now, but it would offer less noise (from the sounds of the surface water hitting the hull) and could mount heavyweight torpedoes in bow tubes. It wouldnt have the underwater endurance of an SSN but would be much cheaper, easier to build, and more versatile as it would also be used in the general-escort role as an FFG replacement. SSNs would still of course be required but why not effectively an underwater-capable ship, this is largely how the U boat wolfpacks operated, and the combination of running on the surface for routine and high speed transits and then submerging for the actual attack or to evade enemy forces, won them much success. Perhaps it could be outfitted with a flightdeck for operating helos such as Lynx from, this would give it another edge in ASW & ASUW, however they would need to be evacuated to another ship prior to diving (perhaps the next generation of AAW warships could be trimaran to give them expanded deckspace and stability?), or the alternative might be a rather expensive system of sealed lifts from hangar to flightdeck. Ian
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4
blacksmith    RE:Submersible ASW escort - half frigate, half submarine   8/23/2005 7:32:32 PM
Attack subs are often attached to Carrier Strike Groups. But could a carrier screen consist principly of subs? Subs see well underwater, but are essentially blind to the sky. Communications is difficult too. IF, you could talk effectively to the sub, and tie it into an airborne sensor network, you would have a screen around the carrier that the attacker does not know the location of. You're the bad guy (CV battle groups are always operated by the good guys). You've made it through the outer air defense, you're getting ready to launch your ASMs, and suddenly a brace of SM-2s pops out of the water with your name on them. Would this be more effective than a frigate that would probably be the protector of the carrier by being the first target?
 
Quote    Reply

AussieEngineer    RE:Submersible ASW escort - half frigate, half submarine   8/23/2005 11:00:11 PM
I think your earlier post got me thinking about a that as well. I was thinking an minimally or even unmanned underwater SAM sub that was datalinked to the battle group could be useful, but then I came to the conclusion that a missile barge built off a commercial super tanker or container ship would be cheaper and easier to datalink with sensors. That is pretty similar to the arsenal ship idea isn't it?
 
Quote    Reply

EW3    RE:Submersible ASW escort - half frigate, half submarine   8/23/2005 11:21:10 PM
That is pretty similar to the arsenal ship idea isn't it? Yes, but it's still a good idea. I have a feeling it was Navy politics that kept the arsenal ship from going forward. We have a glut (75+) Aegis ships. A dozen or so simple cheap vessels that carried extra missiles for the Aegis ship and relied on them for targeting and illumination would add a lot of firepower on the cheap. One arsenal ship with 500 TacToms as an element of a CBG could provide devestating firepower.
 
Quote    Reply

blacksmith    RE:Submersible ASW escort - half frigate, half submarine   8/24/2005 12:07:34 AM
There is a disconnect in previous post. Aegis would illuminate for anti-air. Missiles would be standard SM-2s. TACTOM is land attack. Needs no illumination. Keep in mind that the original intent of the Aegis air defense was to stop huge formations of russian bombers that have or will release a horde of ASMs. There is no threat, or even imminent threat that can conduct an attack like that...even China. An Aegis cruiser or destroyer with 96 standard missiles could, by itself, eliminate entirely most of the air forces on Earth. They don't need more missiles to fire. This is a damning case against DD(X), another big gold plated flag ship for the black shoe sorts being designed to fight the ruskies about...oh...1985. But I digress. But I am a fan of the arsenal ship. Especially if the $Million TACTOMs were replace/augmented with other weapons like the Navy's Low Cost Weapon System that costs $50-100K. The Arsenal ship does not need to be attached to a CVSG. Much like any sub, even if it is a shallow diver, it would work better maneuvering independently. Cheap hulls tend to go slow and would impede the CVSG maneuvering.
 
Quote    Reply

TDHM    RE:I'll explain   8/24/2005 4:51:52 AM
You've misunderstood. Whilst Stingray is lightweight and will kac the range (not that it would need it) and payload, it is still just as deep diving.
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2012StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy