Detecting a sub is one thing, but destroying it is another. Do they have a 'solution' to that?
If they were hard to destroy, why would they care so much about being detected?
Are Submarines About to Become Obsolete?
11–20 of 53 posts
Re: Are Submarines About to Become Obsolete?
#12Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 tha…
Right, but then what is the point of making a submersible carrier as opposed to launching the UUVs from a traditional surface carrier. If your carrier sub is detectable, you aren't going to be getting it any closer than you could get your surface carrier. And I would expect the surface carrier to be easier to build, with more capabilities for self defense.
Re: Are Submarines About to Become Obsolete?
#13Obsolete sounds a little strong. The denied areas for submarine operations will get larger, but the ocean is really big. Running the fixed and mobile sensor arrays to detect submarines is not cheap.
Regardless of the foreseeable improvements in submarine detection, they'll still be harder to find than surface ships.
Re: Are Submarines About to Become Obsolete?
#14This 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 no…
>He is not qualified to say that,
What about Bryan Clark? Is he? http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/naval/submarines/20...
>There is not much danger that these new technologies will be able to detect a sub in our lifetime.
Really? Are you qualified to say that?
Re: Are Submarines About to Become Obsolete?
#15Here's the thing about submarines you may not realize: they are the trump card when it comes to nuclear warfare and keeping MAD in place. If one country "struck first" and tried to wipe out our nuclear silos, nuclear armed subs would retaliate. Given the surface are of the world covered by water, there are quite a few hiding places too.
What happens to MAD after we have a reliable way to detect subs? :/ Don't really know.
Re: Are Submarines About to Become Obsolete?
#16I'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…
I believe the "subs as aircraft carriers" idea came from the fact that you generally want to interact with a target location on land. Nation states don't tend to have too many strategic targets underwater off their coasts.
Options for interacting with a target land location (dates extremely rough, in rough historical order): - Subsonic aircraft: outpaced by projectile-based anti-aircraft since ~1935 - Supersonic aircraft: outpaced and obsoleted by missile and satellite technology since ~1970 - Satellite: excellent for reconnaissance and elint, limited interactive capabilities due to treaty obligations - Subsonic cruise missiles (aka light missiles): limited range (relative to coastal approach), limited survivability against active anti-aircraft defenses - ICBM (aka heavy missiles): expensive, high risk of escalation due to detection, risk of nuclear payload, and ability to apply last minute target corrections - Carrier launched aircraft: limited range, limited survivability against active anti-aircraft defenses - Supersonic cruise missiles: limited range, limited survivability against active anti-aircraft defenses - Drones: limited range, limited survivability against active anti-aircraft defenses
You ideally want an aerial platform (freedom of movement, ability to interact with land targets), survivable in a hostile environment, as cheaply as possible.
This was solved by a carrier air wing.
However, the idea of A2/AD is to push the survivability line out far enough that the carrier can no longer approach close enough to let its air wing operate efficiently.
The obvious go to is to take a platform that can penetrate that A2/AD coverage to a greater depth with acceptable survivability. (It's a lot easier to hide a submarine than an aircraft carrier / it's a lot more expensive to build a submarine detection net across large ocean regions)
Then have that platform launch the equivalent of an air wing.
E.g. stealth submarines serving as carriers for limited-range (because that buys you design to make them stealthier / more survivable / faster) aerial drones
Re: Are Submarines About to Become Obsolete?
#17Here's the thing about submarines you may not realize: they are the trump card when it comes to nuclear warfare and keeping MAD in place. If one country "struck first" and tried to wipe out our nuclear silos, nuclear armed subs would retaliate. Given the surface are of the world covered by water, there are quite a few hiding places too. What happens to MAD after we have a reliable way to detect subs? :/ Don't really…
They aren't the sole trump card, that role is also played by manned bombers that can launch on warning from the middle of the without committing to bomb that targets, without even having the ability to arm their warheads (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permissive_Action_Link ); SLBMs are trump cards against undetectable attacks, or at least ones that can be detected in time, see for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractional_Orbital_Bombardment...
You'd also have to be very confident in your ability to carry out a first strike. Ah, and there's a quick fix, a limited ABM deployment (we've got them and are pretty confident they work). Since you can't pick which warheads get taken out by the ABM systems, the difficultly becomes massively greater.
Note also that historically only the US believed in MAD, the Soviets correctly thought it was unmitigated evil. Then again, they had to accept it....
Re: Are Submarines About to Become Obsolete?
#18Here's the thing about submarines you may not realize: they are the trump card when it comes to nuclear warfare and keeping MAD in place. If one country "struck first" and tried to wipe out our nuclear silos, nuclear armed subs would retaliate. Given the surface are of the world covered by water, there are quite a few hiding places too. What happens to MAD after we have a reliable way to detect subs? :/ Don't really…
This article wasn't talking about Boomers, like the Ohio Class, which can go hide in the middle of the ocean, but attack class submarines, which need to get up close to their target. The theory is that with more advanced detection technology, you can blanket an small area with sensors, and deny that small area to an attack submarine.
This has no implications for MAD.
Re: Are Submarines About to Become Obsolete?
#19I'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…
The submarine aircraft carrier has already been tried http://www.divernet.com/Wrecks/wreck_tours/159473/wreck_tour...
It's a good dive :-)
Re: Are Submarines About to Become Obsolete?
#20Obsolete sounds a little strong. The denied areas for submarine operations will get larger, but the ocean is really big. Running the fixed and mobile sensor arrays to detect submarines is not cheap. Regardless of the foreseeable improvements in submarine detection, they'll still be harder to find than surface ships.
Absolutely. Case in point: the missing Malaysian airplane is yet to be found.