Are Submarines About to Become Obsolete?
nationalinterest.org
Are Submarines About to Become Obsolete?
1–10 of 53 posts
Re: Are Submarines About to Become Obsolete?
#2I forget where I heard it, but in a discussion about stealth fighters and stealth capabilities, the conclusion of one person was that it was a game of material scientists vs computer scientists, and that in the end, computer scientists seem to be able to outpace material scientists.
Re: Are Submarines About to Become Obsolete?
#3I'd suggest reading this article in full. I almost stopped when I read "big data" but it was a worthwhile article with some interesting thoughts on one potential future.
I agree that UUVs could play a big part in underwater warfare/intelligence gathering 10-20 years from now.
Re: Are Submarines About to Become Obsolete?
#4I forget where I heard it, but in a discussion about stealth fighters and stealth capabilities, the conclusion of one person was that it was a game of material scientists vs computer scientists, and that in the end, computer scientists seem to be able to outpace material scientists.
Yeah, I saw a slightly different take saying that in the battle between stealth and detection, physics gives the advantage to the detection side. I have no idea what the justification was or even if it's remotely true, but it seemed like a plausible idea.
Re: Are Submarines About to Become Obsolete?
#5Detecting a sub is one thing, but destroying it is another. Do they have a 'solution' to that?
Re: Are Submarines About to Become Obsolete?
#6I'd suggest reading this article in full. I almost stopped when I read "big data" but it was a worthwhile article with some interesting thoughts on one potential future. I agree that UUVs could play a big part in underwater warfare/intelligence gathering 10-20 years from now.
The model of "subs as aircraft carriers" for UUVs seems less likely, though. UUVs are arguably better deployed like satellites than aircraft. This is the way underwater mines are deployed today: seed an area well in advance of hostilities with mines that dig themselves into the bottom, and activate them remotely at need.
If you posit that submarines are going to be highly detectable (which is reasonable, and has been a risk since the '80's, when thermal signature tracking looked like it might become viable) then there's no particularly compelling reason why you would deploy UUVs from subs rather than from planes or surface ships.
Re: Are Submarines About to Become Obsolete?
#7This guy's premise is that submarines are going to lose their stealthy advantage. He is not qualified to say that, and the technology he mentions could become a threat to subs has been talked about for 20+ years. There is not much danger that these new technologies will be able to detect a sub in our lifetime.
I acknowledge that technology will require subs to become even more quiet, but new propulsion systems are now on the boats instead of propellers. They are quieter than ever and no one could detect us before.
Subs have already become “carriers” of SEALS and rockets. So that mission can only be expanded.
Not much new in the article.
Edit: Source: US Navy submarine nuclear reactor officer, 20+ years
Re: Are Submarines About to Become Obsolete?
#8I'd suggest reading this article in full. I almost stopped when I read "big data" but it was a worthwhile article with some interesting thoughts on one potential future. I agree that UUVs could play a big part in underwater warfare/intelligence gathering 10-20 years from now.
The model of "subs as aircraft carriers" for UUVs seems less likely, though. UUVs are arguably better deployed like satellites than aircraft. This is the way underwater mines are deployed today: seed an area well in advance of hostilities with mines that dig themselves into the bottom, and activate them remotely at need. If you posit that submarines are going to be highly detectable (which is reasonable, and has been…
Those are some great points.
For long term UUV deployments however you would have to deal with the "fuel problem." They will be more efficient than a manned submarine, and can be quite streamlined, but regardless moving water is expensive.
So, for example, dropping them into the water at Hawaii and expecting them to make it to China and back seems "unlikely" because anything large enough to have enough fuel to do that would also likely be detectable (which is the reason you aren't using manned submarines to begin with).
So maybe that's why they're talking about manned submarines as UUV carriers. So that the UUV can have batteries in them and electric motors, maybe 24 hours max of power, and only need to make it 1/8th of the distance otherwise.
Re: Are Submarines About to Become Obsolete?
#9I forget where I heard it, but in a discussion about stealth fighters and stealth capabilities, the conclusion of one person was that it was a game of material scientists vs computer scientists, and that in the end, computer scientists seem to be able to outpace material scientists.
The CS folks can iterate faster with software defined radios.
Re: Are Submarines About to Become Obsolete?
#10I forget where I heard it, but in a discussion about stealth fighters and stealth capabilities, the conclusion of one person was that it was a game of material scientists vs computer scientists, and that in the end, computer scientists seem to be able to outpace material scientists.
Yeah, I saw a slightly different take saying that in the battle between stealth and detection, physics gives the advantage to the detection side. I have no idea what the justification was or even if it's remotely true, but it seemed like a plausible idea.
> Yeah, I saw a slightly different take saying that in the battle between stealth and detection, physics gives the advantage to the detection side.
You could boil this down to saying that moving things fast and stealth are fundamental tradeoffs.
The energy for the former has to come from somewhere, and at anything less than ideal conversion there are only so many places to hide the waste without compromising the latter.