US Navy Polaris SSBN concepts

[Triton]

Early design concepts for the US Navy Polaris SSBN also used variations of the Skipjack-class (SSN-585) nuclear attack submarine design originally intended for the Jupiter SSBN. The Polaris missile was so much smaller than the Jupiter that twice as many missiles could be carried in the hull. This sketch is dated October 25, 1956. Since the missiles are so much smaller than the Jupiter, they no longer have to be carried in the sail. Like the Jupiter SSBN, an elevator elavates the Polaris prior to launch. The sail was retained to hold them above water at the moment of firing. The design was also powered by a S5W nuclear reactor (15,000 SHP). Crew is also 15 officers and 110 enlisted men.

Source: US Submarines Since 1945: An Illustrated Design History by Norman Friedman, US Naval Institute, 1994.

 

[Triton]

Since Polaris was an extremely small missile, compared to the Jupiter, it could be carried within the submarine's hull. This September 25, 1956 sketch shows one possibility of carrying the eight missiles in a magazine and then launching them through two tubes in the sail. The submarine could be made much smaller. Length 320 feet and beam 40 feet. Displacement is 5,200 tons surface and 6,800 tons submerged. All such schemes failed because no acceptable missile elevator could be devised.

Source: US Submarines Since 1945: An Illustrated Design History by Norman Friedman, US Naval Institute, 1994.

 

[Michel Van]

this "Revolver Magazin" Concept is Fascinating
but slow in launching the Polaris Missile

 

[JohnR]

Wouldn't the extremely long sail/conning tower on this and the Jupiter designs have made them difficult to manoeuvre when submerged?

 

[Tzoli]

So there were a PGM-19 Jupiter missile equipped Skipjack SSBN variant?
Also any calculations for the displacement of these Skipjack SSBN variants? Because even the smaller version is almost twice as heavy as the original Skipjack!
Torpedo armament seems to be 4x1 for the SSBN Skipjack and 2 or 3x1 for the smaller version?

 

[Moose]

There was no Jupiter-equipped SSBN produced, it was being studied when Edward Teller pointed out that Polaris could haul warhead well enough to do the job.

 

[Tzoli]

Ahh sorry, I wished to write Jupiter equipped variant proposal or design.

 

[A Tentative Fleet Plan]

Ethan Allen Preliminary designs with PUFFS arrays:



Source:

https://www.reddit.com/r/submarines/comments/c0nso3

View: https://www.reddit.com/r/submarines/comments/c0nso3/mystery_sonar_dome_on_ethan_allenclass_ssbns/

 

[Tzoli]

PUFFS?

 

[TomS]

PUFFS?

Passive Underwater Fire Control Feasibility System. Basically a set of three passive transducers to allow subs to find the range on contacts without going active.

PUFFS, THE MAGIC SONAR - NSL Archive

In the April issue of THE SUBMARINE REVIEW, Rear Admiral Holland offered some very useful ideas about uncertainty in submarine fire control solutions, and by…

archive.navalsubleague.org

 

[jstar]

PUFFS?

Passive Underwater Fire control Feasability System: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_Underwater_Fire_Control_Feasibility_System

 

[A Tentative Fleet Plan]

Passive Underwater Fire Control Feasibility System. Basically a set of three passive transducers to allow subs to find the range on contacts without going active.

PUFFS, THE MAGIC SONAR - NSL Archive

In the April issue of THE SUBMARINE REVIEW, Rear Admiral Holland offered some very useful ideas about uncertainty in submarine fire control solutions, and by…

archive.navalsubleague.org

In this case there are four arrays, a retractable array just above and aft of the BQS-4 bow sonar, a fixed array at the aft end of the sail, a retractable array below and forward of the reactor compartment, and a fixed array under the engine room. Apparently Thresher briefly had a similar experimental layout of four retractable arrays, designated AN/BQG-1 (this designation was apparently also initially used for the three-array system on the Tullibee).

The later six-array system later installed on Thresher, Barb, Blueback and also on some Sturgeon-class boats, consisting of three arrays per side, in the casing at the bow and amidships, and in endplates on the tail, was designated BQG-2.



The three array system used on Tullibee, the GUPPY IIIs and Sailfish-class SSRs was apparently designated BQG-4.

 

[TomS]

In this case there are four arrays, a retractable array just above and aft of the BQS-4 bow sonar, a fixed array at the aft end of the sail, a retractable array below and forward of the reactor compartment, and a fixed array under the engine room. Apparently Thresher briefly had a similar experimental layout of four retractable arrays, designated AN/BQG-1 (this designation was apparently also initially used for the three-array system on the Tullibee).

The later six-array system later installed on Thresher, Barb, Blueback and also on some Sturgeon-class boats, consisting of three arrays per side, in the casing at the bow and amidships, and in endplates on the tail, was designated BQG-2.

View attachment 708658

The three array system used on Tullibee, the GUPPY IIIs and Sailfish-class SSRs was apparently designated BQG-4.

Whoops. Yes, there were multiple configurations, not sure why I said three. Probably because I was thinking of the GUPPYs.

 

[Scott Kenny]

Whoops. Yes, there were multiple configurations, not sure why I said three. Probably because I was thinking of the GUPPYs.

Huh. Didn't realize that PUFFS was installed on ships other than the Guppies!