www.defensenews.com
www.navalnews.com
Only because AUKUS thread is locked last I checked
Navy takes early steps with Australian, UK vendors on shared sub work
The U.S. Navy is increasing its submarine work with Australian and British firms, even as it awaits passage of four key measures to enable AUKUS.www.defensenews.com
Big SSGNs, I'm expecting. So maybe we can keep the big cruise missile capacity in service.
www.defensenews.com
I'm expecting a clean sheet design of sorts.Rear Adm. Jon Rucker, PEO for attack submarines, speaking Nov 7 at the Naval Submarine League’s annual symposium
US Navy upgrading torpedoes, leveraging cloud computing for submarines
Apart from defeating torpedoes with torpedoes (yes, you read that right), the Navy is also improving its safety gear.
Looks like they're planning on the sub being in rough water a lot when at periscope depth. Dihedrals increase righting moment when banking or getting rolled.
The guys on the Seawolf called them anhedrals.
Wouldn‘t Sail Planes then not make more sense?
Not sure what Sutton's exactly saying (was it in a tweet somewhere?), but doesn't this take away from the whole "superior undersea predator stalking PRC/RU submarine and surface groups" mission profile SSN(X) is supposed to be for?
The bow tubes are sitting in a ballast tank, not the weapons room, and USN tubes are already angled around the bow sonar. A Block III-onward boat has 4 horizontal tubes and 2 vertical payload tubes packed in a 10m beam, a -21 has a 12m beam and SSN(X) may be 13m if they're re-using SSBN tooling. That's plenty of elbow room for 6 + 2 of so desired. The balance of the weapons load on a boat this big can still favor a large torpedo armament while retaining payload tubes for an expanded mission set.
Again, the payload tubes external to the pressure hull aren't dictating the torpedo room size. That volume behind the sonar exists because USN boats are single hulled which feature large ballast tanks fore and aft. Over the course of 688 construction, they gained storage for a massive long-line towed arrays in their aft tank, and the forward tank gained VLS without affecting their weapons load in the pressure hull. That VLS carried to SSN-774 then transitioned to Payload Tubes in Block III.
The vertical tubes take up most of the room behind the sonar leaving a very small weapons room on the Virginia class.
Seawolf had 50 stores in its torpedo room, Virginia due to its arrangement has only 25 but less if carrying special forces as they bunk in there in the empty torpedo racks by carrying fewer weapons as it doesnt have spare bunk space elsewhere in the sub.
Seawolf's magazine depth had nothing to do with the length of the magazine spaces behind the torpedo tubes, her magazine was spread across two decks and the submarine had a wider diameter pressure hull, hence the magazine spaces were wider. She still had some volume between the front of the pressure hull and sonar sphere, and given that modern US submarine bow sonars are now conformal, there should be more volume still for payload modules.
The vertical tubes take up most of the room behind the sonar leaving a very small weapons room on the Virginia class.
Seawolf had 50 stores in its torpedo room, Virginia due to its arrangement has only 25 but less if carrying special forces as they bunk in there in the empty torpedo racks by carrying fewer weapons as it doesnt have spare bunk space elsewhere in the sub.
Someone may be pulling my leg, but apparently the proper term for the stern planes is "negative dihedral" planes and they're shortened to "dihedral" for brevity's sake.
Sail planes cause issues with under-ice operations. 637s had sail planes that could go vertical to bust through ice, but IIRC the early 688s were not rated for under ice operations until the flight with bow planes.
I still don't get why the Seawolfs didn't have any VLS up forward, but I fully expect the SSNX to have a few. Maybe even 4x VPMs if they use the big Columbia class hull rings.
Because Seawolfs were designed to be SSBN hunters, not to TLAM Murmansk.
Now re-openedOnly because AUKUS thread is locked last I checked
Navy takes early steps with Australian, UK vendors on shared sub work
The U.S. Navy is increasing its submarine work with Australian and British firms, even as it awaits passage of four key measures to enable AUKUS.
You don't need 50 weapons to go SSBN hunting.
Another reason for dihedral bow planes is to make them perpendicular to the hull at the point they connect. This simplifies the flow around them, no fairings or anything to mess up the hull shape. Half the reason the old F4U Corsair had inverted gull wings.
The deep magazine was to ensure that Seawolf could remain on station for longer, without having to cross anti-submarine barriers patrolled by other NATO submarines, reducing the chance of friendly fire and thus increasing survivability.
Maybe the reasoning is that the extra weight and cost is not worth it when, if the opponent is using active sonar, they're detectable at twice the range that the SSNX is.
The -21s carried a big torpedo armament because they were going to stay in Soviet waters for extended periods without coming out for replenishment.
Certainly.
NATO subs generally operate alone.
So did Soviet/Russian, Chinese, etc. Because it's extremely difficult to coordinate while everyone is submerged.
From what I understand Russia and China still rely on wolfpack tactics.
Maybe against surface convoys, since everyone will be at or near periscope depth for the attacks. Much easier to coordinate when your target is a known location and all of your hunting buddies can be known locations.
