Go Navy!

[ladajo]

The U.S. Navy has been running a program called the Diesel Boat Initiative for years. It is where we bring foreign SS platforms to the U.S. and use them as threat platforms for training of our crews.
The boats they face vary in skill levels. That said, I never said that SS and SSP are not quiet. I also happen to know that Christian is very very good.
But that said, you also need to know that the dairy is fromt he perspective of the 212A. This is the trouble with submarine warfare, until you get shot, you really don't know what the other guy knows. You have to guess.

[Skipjack]

Are you translating that as 1500 meters or 1.5 meters?

You should also know that Christian Moritz is a good friend of mine.

its 1500 meters. Sorry, somehow reverted to German punctuation instead of the English comma (guess the result of me translating from German to English!
Very cool that you know the Captain of U32! How did you meet him?
Either way, he would probably be able to give you a better and more first hand account of these exercises and the effectiveness of the 212A. I would sure love to hear more about it. I only know people that were on the 206 and I knew a couple of people that were on WW2 boats.

[ladajo]

We have known each other for a few years. We met professionally.
Our wives are also friends. Our kids would be friends, but their child is still too young.

As I said, Christian is very very good. He is also brilliant, a very smart man.

The distance would have been 1500 meters for sure, it is not possible that it was 1.5 as there are safety margins for closures during training and exercises.
It is not surprising that at 1 mile, an SS running full silent was not picked up. It is also hard to maintain such quiet for any extended period.

You hunt diesels with a twin prong strategy. One is boat silent endurance, the other is key watchstander endurance. You wear either one down and you have the boat.
It is not easy to get a shot off without a counter fire.

The other limiting factor for SS platforms is power projection. Without an operating base, they can not do it effectively. Forward resupply is crucial. This is a third axis of attack against diesels. Go after the log support, or the access to it. You can cork them in, or catch them on the in/out also.
Diesels are also speed limited. In a tactical situation, they must stay below 5 knots or the battery goes away really fast. Noise also goes up. They tend to pick an op spot and camp on it. Re-positioning can be impossible given limiting lines of approach and endurance issues.

Nuclear boats are not speed limited and can go months without resupply.

[Skipjack]

We have known each other for a few years. We met professionally.
Our wives are also friends. Our kids would be friends, but their child is still too young.

As I said, Christian is very very good. He is also brilliant, a very smart man.

The distance would have been 1500 meters for sure, it is not possible that it was 1.5 as there are safety margins for closures during training and exercises.
It is not surprising that at 1 mile, an SS running full silent was not picked up. It is also hard to maintain such quiet for any extended period.

You hunt diesels with a twin prong strategy. One is boat silent endurance, the other is key watchstander endurance. You wear either one down and you have the boat.
It is not easy to get a shot off without a counter fire.

The other limiting factor for SS platforms is power projection. Without an operating base, they can not do it effectively. Forward resupply is crucial. This is a third axis of attack against diesels. Go after the log support, or the access to it. You can cork them in, or catch them on the in/out also.
Diesels are also speed limited. In a tactical situation, they must stay below 5 knots or the battery goes away really fast. Noise also goes up. They tend to pick an op spot and camp on it. Re-positioning can be impossible given limiting lines of approach and endurance issues.

Nuclear boats are not speed limited and can go months without resupply.

The 212A is not really a diesel electric. Though it has a diesel generator for emergencies and to charge the additional batteries, its main power source is a hydrogen fuel cell that allows it to stay submerged for up to 3 weeks (depending on how efficiently they handle the power, could be longer too, since the full endurance is classified). They also have a higher tactical speed than diesel electric boats and they can add the battery for even more performance. They even transit long distances fully submerged (without snorkel) and at a good march speed. Do not forget that these boats are not meant to operate that far away from their home bases (eastern and northern sea and Mediterranean) and thus have different requirements than the large nuclear subs. E.g. the 212 can dive in waters as shallow as 16 meters, I want to see a 774 do that . The water in the Mediterranean is very clear too, so being small helps there as well.
Cool to know you are friends with Christian! I would absolutely expect a German submarine captain to be very intelligent and careful. They only choose the best.

[ladajo]

There is an infrastruture penalty that goes with the AIP. They have to have a forward detachment with extensive equipment to support the boat, and mostly H2 reloading.
Even with the fuel cell, there are limitations to speed and endurance. It is not as golden as you percieve. The tenants to beat them still hold.
They were not built to support power projection.
I have another good friend, who also happens to be friends with Christian, that is a Swedish submariner and he had extensive experience doing forward operations with H2 AIP buring his command tours. I have seen this in person, as well as discussed it at length with these guys and others.
I am fairly well versed in the operational capabilities and requirements for SS & SSP platforms.

[Skipjack]

There is an infrastruture penalty that goes with the AIP.

I agree with that. Reloading the LOX is also very difficult and dangerous. Still, the 212A is very good for what it is meant to do and seemingly it did a pretty decent job in the maneuver as well, even though that might have been outside its originally intended job. Sure, you can get it into trouble by making it do something it is not built for, but, a good captain will probably try to avoid that
I stick with it, the 212A is one of the best subs out there, nuclear or not, as long as you operate it within its intended parameters, which is true for nuclear submarines as well. You wont have a Virginia class dive through the 17 meter deep Mecklenburger bay, just like you wont have a 212A hunt for Russian SSBNs below the arctic ice shelf or operate in the middle of the Pacific ocean.
In this regard this paper is rather interesting:
https://www.usnwc.edu/getattachment/2ef ... LITTO.aspx

I want to point out that some of the numbers given for the 212A seem to be overly conservative. E.g. U32 broke a record for SSKs by transiting 4600 sea miles (8500 km) in 18 days while fully submerged and running an average of 10 knots, (from what I understand) running only on the fuel cells. This is a lot better than the values given in the paper. Plus the fuel cells have seen a steady improvement since their introduction. The newer 212 boats have an improved endurance and better electronics and the older ones (like U32) will be updated at some point (if they haven't been already since then). From what I understand the requirements for the number of active crew during non combat operation have been further reduced, so that they can rotate crew in 3 shifts now (have to find that article again). Also need to point out again that one of the requirements for the type 212 (like the 206 and 205) was that it has to be able to operate submerged in waters only 16 meters (52 feet) deep (also better than the 40 feet below keel that the paper provides).

[ladajo]

They ran the snorkel.

It is funny, you keep dredging up people I know. Milan is an interesting man. Feel lucky you stumbled across one of his few works that did not come with a history compendium built in.
Personally, I don't agree with some of his findings on boats. He makes a simple argument (somewhat repetatively, but that is his style), and forgoes some of the more complex integrated points to the discussion.

Fundamentally, small craft of any flavor work better in congested environments. This is a basic truism no matter the domain, and that is Milan's argument. He can sometimes be the master of the obvious. More often than not, it takes him a long time to do it in conversation while he cites historical examples and comparisons.

Now that said, several points for you to consider beyond the obvious achilles heel of the support site (which in an expeditionary fight would go away violently about 30 minutes after being found), are the ability to sense in your oft cited 17 meters, as well as fire weapons. How far do you think you could deteck and track, and how many targets are engagable, even if you got the weapon out and hot straight and normal? Do you think there may be undiscussed issues? Now, say you do get a shot off, how well do you think you can run away? Have you ever heard of "squat"? Operating in such confined waters is really only good for ISR and maneuver sneaks. And you might be very surprised at how little water SSN's have been able to do these types of missions in.

And again, as I have said before the 212 SSPs are good boats for what they were made for.

[Skipjack]

They ran the snorkel.

I thought that for a moment as well, but an article said that it was only with the fuel cells. It would also make no sense if it was snorkling, since the record with snorkel was much longer and established decades earlier.

It is funny, you keep dredging up people I know. Milan is an interesting man. Feel lucky you stumbled across one of his few works that did not come with a history compendium built in.

Fundamentally, small craft of any flavor work better in congested environments.

Well, duh

Now that said, several points for you to consider beyond the obvious achilles heel of the support site (which in an expeditionary fight would go away violently about 30 minutes after being found), are the ability to sense in your oft cited 17 meters, as well as fire weapons. How far do you think you could deteck and track, and how many targets are engagable, even if you got the weapon out and hot straight and normal? Do you think there may be undiscussed issues? Now, say you do get a shot off, how well do you think you can run away? Have you ever heard of "squat"? Operating in such confined waters is really only good for ISR and maneuver sneaks. And you might be very surprised at how little water SSN's have been able to do these types of missions in.

I am thinking about reconnaissance, commando and mining operations, less engaging enemies directly.
The support site is a problem, but that is a problem one way or the other. Sure SSN can stay operational for months, but if one gets hit in the base, you might have a lot of shit to deal with as well.
SSKs can be supported by special ships, like the tender Main of the Bundesmarine and in case of a crisis, I am sure there are other potential and mobile options for supporting them.

And again, as I have said before the 212 SSPs are good boats for what they were made for.

That's what I say too. It depends on the environment you are operating in. Either way, the article also claims that the 212A is more silent than the Virginia. That does not mean that you would want to engage a Virginia in its turf, where it is as its strongest.

[ladajo]

Also, for your education, when you say a boat is quiet, there is a lot behind a statement like that.
It is not such a simple thing as they don't make noise.
Everything makes noise, it is the types of noise and also a factor of the environment they are in that matter.
Boats also reflect different noises differently. And that also goes into how "quiet" they are.

VA Class are very quiet boats.
SSPs can also be very quiet.
Which is better is something that I will not discuss in great depth.

Another thing to consider is the ability of a boat to conduct tactical operations and be quiet.
A useful tactic, and one favored especially by non-nuclear is what I call the "land mine". They sit and wait in as quiet a configuration as possible as long as they can hoping someone will step on them and they get a shot off. Think of it like sniper work at sea. Snipers are not highly mobile when making a kill. They typically sneak in carefully, set up shop at a known point with coverage of an identified target area. Pop off a few shots, and then scoot.
After a shot, getting away is another issue entirely.

Diesels and variants can be useful for littoral sneak and peek. They are also useful for small SOF incursions only (space is a reall issue), and can be useful for static mining. Although that is dependant on the class and risk factors associated with the mine emplacements. Submarines are really not the best thing to do anything more than harrassment mining.

As we agree, they have a purpose, and can be good at it, but beyond that, and you are quickly incurring probably unacceptable risk for return.

[Skipjack]

Everything makes noise, it is the types of noise and also a factor of the environment they are in that matter.

Yes, the 212A is allegedly very silent (as in making very little noise) and the noise it makes also blends in very well with the environment. It is very difficult to distinguish from normal environment sounds.

Another thing to consider is the ability of a boat to conduct tactical operations and be quiet.

I get that and from what I understand the 212A is pretty good at that as well.

A useful tactic, and one favored especially by non-nuclear is what I call the "land mine". They sit and wait in as quiet a configuration as possible as long as they can hoping someone will step on them and they get a shot off. Think of it like sniper work at sea. Snipers are not highly mobile when making a kill. They typically sneak in carefully, set up shop at a known point with coverage of an identified target area. Pop off a few shots, and then scoot.
After a shot, getting away is another issue entirely.

Well that's true for all boats though. The 212 has the ability to silently press the torpedo out of its tubes via water pressure. That should theoretically not give away its position. Since the torpedo is cable controlled, they can leave the direct vicinity before activating it. That should give them a bit of head room to escape before all hell breaks loose. The new torpedoes are very silent too, from what I hear.

Diesels and variants can be useful for littoral sneak and peek. They are also useful for small SOF incursions only (space is a reall issue),

From what I understand these are the main jobs of the 212A.

and can be useful for static mining.
Although that is dependant on the class and risk factors associated with the mine emplacements. Submarines are really not the best thing to do anything more than harrassment mining.

Mining has always been an important part of the capabilities for German post WW2 subs. The 206 was able to carry a whole belt of mines externally and the 212 can carry 24 mines in its tubes. Since they can get so close to harbors and operate in such shallow waters, mining with these subs should be really interesting. You should be able to drop them off right in front of the enemy.

As we agree, they have a purpose, and can be good at it, but beyond that, and you are quickly incurring probably unacceptable risk for return.

[/quote]
Isn't that true for every weapons system?

[ladajo]

The 212 has the ability to silently press the torpedo out of its tubes via water pressure. That should theoretically not give away its position. Since the torpedo is cable controlled, they can leave the direct vicinity before activating it. That should give them a bit of head room to escape before all hell breaks loose. The new torpedoes are very silent too, from what I hear.

Well....no.

All submarines use water based ejection systems. Old boats used air, but that is extremely noisy. Water rams are less noisy, but in todays age very loud. In addition, some boats support swim out of the weapons, which is quieter.

Torpedoes are not quiet. To get any kind of useful speed in the package, they produce a noticable high pitch blade rate.
And you do not push it out the tube and activate it later via wire. You completely do not understand the physics and mechanics. Nice try though.

You can carry weapons in tubes, but racks are what matters for magazine depth. Tube carried weapons should be pulled periodically as well. The longer it sits, the more likely it will have an issue come go time.
Boats like the 212 are limited due to space for racks. Some SS platforms can only carry a single reload for each tube.
External weapon mounts make a boat noisy and limit speed.
And for the record, 24 mines does not a useful field make. That is harrassment mining.
You are better off dropping a couple here and there. When one mine is found, the assumption until proven otherwise is that there are many more.
That is why harrassment mining can be very effective 'naval guerrilla warfare'.
But I digress.
You would think that I do joint & naval strategy and operational warfare for a living.

[Skipjack]

All submarines use water based ejection systems. Old boats used air, but that is extremely noisy. Water rams are less noisy, but in todays age very loud. In addition, some boats support swim out of the weapons, which is quieter.

I think most of them would do swim out these days, no? Air pressure is more used for pressing out various missiles of sorts, right.
I am pretty sure the Germans had evaluated the "swim out" method for torpedoes but determined that they can make the water rams more quiet. I think it makes sense too. Water does not cause bubbles and a running torpedo that is swimming out can cause vibrations. That is at least the explanation that I remember hearing or reading somewhere for why the water rams were chosen.
I admit that I might be wrong there and the Germans are just stupid for choosing a more complex water system instead of just having the torpedo swim out.

Torpedoes are not quiet. To get any kind of useful speed in the package, they produce a noticable high pitch blade rate.

Well, the new DM2A4 Seahake is allegedly very quiet and very hard to detect. How quiet and hard to detect is of course a matter of perspective and is probably meant to be understood as a relative term compared to other torpedoes.

And you do not push it out the tube and activate it later via wire. You completely do not understand the physics and mechanics. Nice try though.

Exaplain to me where I am erring there, please. It was how I interpreted the whole idea of pressing it out via water ram instead of having it simply run out of the tube.

You can carry weapons in tubes, but racks are what matters for magazine depth. Tube carried weapons should be pulled periodically as well. The longer it sits, the more likely it will have an issue come go time.
Boats like the 212 are limited due to space for racks. Some SS platforms can only carry a single reload for each tube.

I totally agree with that and it is a major issue for the 212 and any other smaller SS. The 212A can only carry 12 torpedoes, 6 in the tubes and 6 in the spare racks. This is clearly not enough if you imagine the 212A as a boat that is doing extended patrols in the oceans of the world. That is not what it is meant to do though.

External weapon mounts make a boat noisy and limit speed.
And for the record, 24 mines does not a useful field make. That is harrassment mining.
You are better off dropping a couple here and there. When one mine is found, the assumption until proven otherwise is that there are many more.
That is why harrassment mining can be very effective 'naval guerrilla warfare'.

The 212A does not carry the mines externally anymore (like the 206A did) but optionally in (some of) the torpedo tubes. 24 mines can still make for a really bad surprise if you were to place them in a tight, shallow spot (which is why the small German SS are so effective for this, since they can dive in littoral and shallow waters).

I never doubt your understanding of naval warfare. I do however think that you underestimate the capabilities of modern SS.

[ltgbrown]

Might I suggest you two stop before one of you gets yourself in trouble, especially you Ladajo. There are a few things that "authorities" take very seriously and submarine technology and performance is one of them. Suffice it to say, US submarines are quite and have significant advantages because of nuclear propulsion and the 212 has unique capabilities. They are designed to meet different requirements. Trying to argue capability is only going to get at least one of you in trouble.

Glenn
Enlisted Submarine Warfare Qualified
Diving Officer of the Watch Qualified SSBN 734

[Skipjack]

Might I suggest you two stop before one of you gets yourself in trouble, especially you Ladajo. There are a few things that "authorities" take very seriously and submarine technology and performance is one of them. Suffice it to say, US submarines are quite and have significant advantages because of nuclear propulsion and the 212 has unique capabilities. They are designed to meet different requirements. Trying to argue capability is only going to get at least one of you in trouble.

Glenn
Enlisted Submarine Warfare Qualified
Diving Officer of the Watch Qualified SSBN 734

None of the things discussed here are not already available in the public domain.

[ladajo]

Thanks for the concern Glenn. Fair point and noted.

Skip, in your question about wires and whatnot. Take a step back and think about it. Does it make any possible sense that a submarine in motion would push a weapon out a tube and then let it sit in front of the boat without it running and a wire hanging back into the boat? What do you think would happen next?
Without going into much detail, wires are for updates, not an on switch.

As for water rams, I still don't understand where you assertion comes from that they are quiet. You are pushing a heavy and long 21 inch diameter object out of a relatively tight fitting tube that is longer than the weapon. That takes some energy. And energy in water makes noise.
Here is a video on the F21 French torp. It is educational. Think about how much energy it takes to get the weapon to do what is displayed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbeQmfXE0ws