Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Modern submarine torpedo attacks are not like in the movies

thedrive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 219 posts

Re: Modern submarine torpedo attacks are not like in the movies

#101

Post by kitteh »

sandworm101 wrote: post #78
kitteh wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh. There are documented dogfights out there that are dramatic, they even made a show about it with the actual pilots: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogfights_(TV_series) That said, there are countless stories about US pilots locking up a bandit who has a RWR system that scares them into turning around (they'd see/hear that they were receiving high PRF - being locked on). That happened a lot more in the 70s and aft…

>> a bandit who has a RWR system that scares them into turning around They weren't necessarily scared. Such maneuvers are stock counters to potential radar-guided missiles. (1) Missile ranges depend on closing speed. You can launch against something coming towards you sooner than something heading away. By turning around, or just sideways, the mig can instantly get outside of missile range. (2) Doppler radar measures…

I'm well familiar with Doppler notching and missile evasion. However in the accounts I was speaking about it was cases where they turned around and departed the area. Follow up conversations with some of these crews (which included Iraqi pilots, Libyan pilots to name a few) said that once they had seen the transition from being hit from search radar to acquisition radar they didn't want to provoke any further and chose to exit the engagement. Remember that during the 1980s the Phoenix AIM-54 had a scary reputation for it's range as well as the later AIM-120.

Re: Modern submarine torpedo attacks are not like in the movies

#102

Post by missedthecue »

sandworm101 wrote: post #95
sandworm101 wrote: post #72

Take EVERYTHING in that article with a giant tub of salt. The specifics of torpedo combat are some of the most closely guarded military secrets. Take the following: "These high-torque, permanent magnet electric motor torpedoes ramp up to speed in under a second. They go from sitting in a torpedo tube to 50 knots in a near-instant because they don’t have the mechanical lag and inertia thermal torpedoes must overcome d…

More wrong stuff... "It is best if the weapon detonates within a meter of the hull, but a contact detonation can have devastating effects against even the largest warships." Torpedoes targeting ships definitely do not want to hit anywhere near the hull. They explode well beneath the target, tens of meters below. They don't try to directly damage the target. Their explosives create a large void of gas, a hole, under t…

The Russian VA-111 Shkval torpedo explodes on impact, but then again, it's traveling underwater at 370km/h

Re: Modern submarine torpedo attacks are not like in the movies

#103

Post by willvarfar »

sandworm101 wrote: post #72

Take EVERYTHING in that article with a giant tub of salt. The specifics of torpedo combat are some of the most closely guarded military secrets. Take the following: "These high-torque, permanent magnet electric motor torpedoes ramp up to speed in under a second. They go from sitting in a torpedo tube to 50 knots in a near-instant because they don’t have the mechanical lag and inertia thermal torpedoes must overcome d…

You are over-analyzing. There is nothing in the sentence you quote that says if the torpedo was launched or swam out etc. Nothing in the sentence you quote even qualified how long "near instant" was. Etc.

You are also saying you know more about this subject than the sub vet who wrote the article...?

Re: Modern submarine torpedo attacks are not like in the movies

#104

Post by willvarfar »

goatinaboat wrote: post #94
phkahler wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Recently saw an old video on youtube about that. Top Gun was created in response to heavy losses in Vietnam. It was very small and they had trouble even finding space for classes. A turning point came when a Mig was captured and they trained with it to find weaknesses. After that everything changed. The kill ratio inverted and they did start to run when engaged in some cases. Your uncle was lucky to go after the stra…

Top Gun was created in response to heavy losses in Vietnam That in itself is a crucial piece of historical context. The MiGs of the day were better than contemporary American fighters such as the F-86. They operated at altitudes the Americans couldn’t reach and shot downwards. One reason America was in Vietnam in the first place was a genuine fear that the Soviet system was actually better! It was the Sidewinder miss…

The F86 was on a rough par with the MIG15 in Korea. Yeager's assessment was that it was all about pilots, not the planes.

Trivia: the Soviets eventually recovered an intact downed Sabre and shipped it to Russia for evaluation. They copied from it, including the Sabre's gun-sight that later fitted out the MIGs in Vietnam.

Did the F86 ever serve in the Vietnam war?

Re: Modern submarine torpedo attacks are not like in the movies

#105

Post by Spooky23 »

goatinaboat wrote: post #94
phkahler wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Recently saw an old video on youtube about that. Top Gun was created in response to heavy losses in Vietnam. It was very small and they had trouble even finding space for classes. A turning point came when a Mig was captured and they trained with it to find weaknesses. After that everything changed. The kill ratio inverted and they did start to run when engaged in some cases. Your uncle was lucky to go after the stra…

Top Gun was created in response to heavy losses in Vietnam That in itself is a crucial piece of historical context. The MiGs of the day were better than contemporary American fighters such as the F-86. They operated at altitudes the Americans couldn’t reach and shot downwards. One reason America was in Vietnam in the first place was a genuine fear that the Soviet system was actually better! It was the Sidewinder miss…

US strategy in the 50s when this stuff was designed or ordered was oriented around our friend the atom... nuke everyone. At one point there was serious discussion about the need for a Navy.

Vietnam was a crucible where a lot of entrenched thinking had to be burned away, unfortunately those lessons were taught in the context of that awful conflict.

Re: Modern submarine torpedo attacks are not like in the movies

#106

Post by avar »

WalterBright wrote: post #79
phkahler wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Recently saw an old video on youtube about that. Top Gun was created in response to heavy losses in Vietnam. It was very small and they had trouble even finding space for classes. A turning point came when a Mig was captured and they trained with it to find weaknesses. After that everything changed. The kill ratio inverted and they did start to run when engaged in some cases. Your uncle was lucky to go after the stra…

The FW-190 was cutting Allied aircraft to pieces in WW2, until the Allies captured one intact, learned its weaknesses, and turned the tables. To get extra range, the P-51s had a large fuel tank installed just behind the pilot (where the passenger seat goes if you've ever gotten a ride). Unfortunately, full of fuel caused a large imbalance in the airplane, making it nearly unmaneuverable. Naturally, the pilots would b…

According to Wikipedia's article on the P-51[1]:

> Bomber escort defenses were initially layered, using the shorter-range P-38s and P-47s to escort the bombers during the initial stages of the raid before handing over to the P-51s when they were forced to turn for home.

So it sounds like even if the Germans knew it wouldn't have mattered much, and even then these planes were taking off from Britain for the most part.

Even then, a lot more than just this piece of intelligence would need to happen for the Luftwaffe to engage airplanes shortly after takeoff across the English channel.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_P-51_Mustang#P-...

Re: Modern submarine torpedo attacks are not like in the movies

#107

Post by willvarfar »

ckozlowski wrote: post #99
sandworm101 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are sometimes called "stealth" torps. They run quiet, and slow, so they don't want the noisy launch procedure. But they also don't do 50 knots. On the other end of the scale there are the rocket torpedoes, really missiles that fly underwater at speeds over 200 knots. You might hear them coming but won't be able to do much about them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VA-111_Shkval And there are even anti-aircraft t…

Actually, latter versions of the Mark 48 will do this, running at variable speed. Slow launch, creep towards the target, and dogleg even, then run up to 50+ knots once it's close enough to be heard. With wire guidance, the sub could essentially drive the torpedo to where they wanted it before violent speed and maneuvering would likely cut the wires. This was depicted somewhat famously in the book Red Storm Rising. By…

Manpad-type missiles like the British Blowpipe have been mounted on submarine masks.

A major threat to a submarine is all the helicopters and patrol aircraft with their dipping sonars etc. There are some really great pics taken from periscopes of opposition helicopters during the cold war. Nothing you'd want to see in a hot war neither.

It seems good to throw a little missile at the helicopter you've just spotted approaching, to give them something to evade and worry about as you make your escape?

Re: Modern submarine torpedo attacks are not like in the movies

#108

Post by Spooky23 »

dylan604 wrote: post #87
magicsmoke wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article's description of submarine warfare is surprisingly similar to how modern air combat is supposed to play out, and parallels modern artillery's shoot and scoot philosophy as well. Hide, find, hit, and hide again.

Long gone are the days of the British soldiers taking a knee in formations to shoot their muskets. Essentially expecting to take turns with the enemy trading shots. Never did understand that mentality at all.

It was an innovative approach in the Napoleonic era. French units would form up in columns with the idea of punching through the line with conscripts. The British would spread out and deliver a much higher volume of fire, and do so very quickly.

Re: Modern submarine torpedo attacks are not like in the movies

#109

Post by WalterBright »

avar wrote: post #106
WalterBright wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The FW-190 was cutting Allied aircraft to pieces in WW2, until the Allies captured one intact, learned its weaknesses, and turned the tables. To get extra range, the P-51s had a large fuel tank installed just behind the pilot (where the passenger seat goes if you've ever gotten a ride). Unfortunately, full of fuel caused a large imbalance in the airplane, making it nearly unmaneuverable. Naturally, the pilots would b…

According to Wikipedia's article on the P-51[1]: > Bomber escort defenses were initially layered, using the shorter-range P-38s and P-47s to escort the bombers during the initial stages of the raid before handing over to the P-51s when they were forced to turn for home. So it sounds like even if the Germans knew it wouldn't have mattered much, and even then these planes were taking off from Britain for the most part.…

The Luftwaffe even in 1944 was known to sneak through Allied defenses and shoot down B-17s. My father served as a B-17 navigator in 1944 and heard a Luftwaffe fighter shoot two bursts and bring down 2 B-17s in the landing pattern. The B-17s were caught by surprise cleaning their guns and never fired a shot back.

The Luftwaffe could have taken out a squadron of P-51s with just a handful of fighters. This would have required the AAC to then launch a bunch of fighters to protect the long range fighters until the tank was burned off, significantly hampering their power.

The P-51 was basically unable to turn with the center of gravity so far back.

Re: Modern submarine torpedo attacks are not like in the movies

#110

Post by LilBytes »

_jal wrote: post #63
c3534l wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I knew a guy who was a chemical, nuclear, and biological weapons guy in the army. He took bomb diffusal training, studied old soviet missiles, the lot. What did he do on a day to day basis? Mostly blew up grenades that didn't blow up on their own. Apparently it was super boring.

That's the sort of job you want to be super boring.

Likely because it has the chance to be super exciting _once_.
Post reply on HN