The idea of double shotting your torpedo tube is fascinating, it's like going back to the age of sail where they would be standard either double or triple shot their guns (having two or three cannon balls in the gun, to increase number of rounds)
In addition to lower flow noise there is also lower low-frequency "beat noise" from when the screw blades cross the flow turbulence/discontinuity from the sail. For example for a 5-blade screw turning at 200 rpm a blades will cross the sail wake 5*200/60 = 17 times/second. The resulting low-frequency noise travels very well in the deep ocean, and the US exploited this to great effect against Soviet submarines in the cold way. Skewback screws are less susceptible, but not immune. Pumpjets are much less susceptible and tend to move the frequency up to higher frequencies where it doesn't travel as well. The problem with non-nuclear subs is that they have very limited strategic mobility and are therefore best suited to operating areas close to their bases, but the US is deemed to have no such operating areas. You could argue that the US could forward base flotillas of SSKs in, say, Japan and some Baltic state[s], but at that point why not just let those allies focus on SSKs themselves? What could a US SSK do that the very advanced Japanese fleet can't? wrt special mission subs, I think that Jimmy Carter is a golden example of a UUV mothership along the lines that you discussed at the start of the video. The Russians place a larger emphasis on manned submarines like Losharik for seabed work, but the US has largely gone UUV-centric since the retirement of NR-1 and the DSRVs.
19:42 I think the suction effect might have to do with the pressure differential near the surface, which is much greater than at depth. For every 10 meters you go down, one atmosphere is added. So this is linear. However that means that between 0 and 10 meters, there is a doubling of the pressure. Between 10 and 20 meters, it's just 50% more. Etc etc etc. More pressure pushing against the lower part of the submarine than against the higher part will exert a net force in an upward direction. However, if this is taken into account in how the sub is controlled (in a modern sub I assume there's even a "fly-by-wire" system in place), I guess that it should be manageable. Edit: nevermind, I forgot Archimedes. The upward force acting upon a body in water is equal to the weight of the water displaced. So depth does not play a role.
Don't know where you got that impression. We admire the Japanese subs and though seriously about acquiring them. As for the Collins we are just happy that they arent as crap as first thought. It will be interesting to see how AUKUS turns out. The plan is to get worked up on a couple of US nuclear subs before building the Astute class in Australia. HypoHystericalHistory has a detailed and long ( 2hr) rundown on the program.
@@daniellarge9784 RE: "Don't know where you got that impression. We admire the Japanese subs..." Based on social media comments regarding how Japanese subs were inferior to Collins and other conventional subs.
The way the sail can act as a hydrofoil and make the sub flip upside down suddenly could be tactically really useful if your submarine was ever being attacked by a lion, because then you could roll upside down and play dead, making the lion lose interest and allowing you to make your escape quickly. So, that could be a plus, I feel, a feature or selling point, when listing the suite of self defense options a sub has.
Great presentation as always. Thank you for that. If I may, I do think that I-400 types Subs would be very important for any Navy. F-35s operating from a Submarine would be a formidable weapon platform.
23:42 while having some sort of AIP sub would expand the USN's capabilities, its much easier to offload that work onto other NATO or NATO alligned(Sweden and Japan) countries. This would manage some of the problems the US would face if they attempted to field AIP/litoral subs themselves. Most importantly the infastructure. The countries that already have these types of subs are much closer to potential areas of operation where the subs would be needed which would get around the need for the US to foward deploy the necessary support staff and materials to either Europe or the Pacific. Also it aviods the politics of building conventional subs in US yards, which would probably result in a significant reduction or outright cancelation of the Virginia Class. Which would effectivley offset any gains in capabilities made by the introduction of litoral subs. This is also incredibly unlikely, especailly now with the news that the USN and RN will provide Australia with Nuclear powered attack submarines. I feel like going foward the US and UK should look more to allys to support more niche combat operations(Special Warfare, litoral combat, etc). While the RN, USN, and even MN focus on larger scale blue water operations and strategic sealift
Q: Anti-sub work was traditionally done with surface vessels, why is it now done with other subs? Are they better at it or is it cost (no need for AAW)?
At 33:25 (about X-form control surfaces) you state: "... if one of them jams...". If you think about it there's still some control up-down and left-right if ALL BUT one jams. Enough to limp back to base. That's a huge level of redundancy!
Great content! Certainly learnt quite a bit from this video! I have one topic in mind and hopefully you can explain them in the next Q&A session: Fairwater Planes vs Bow Planes - why some navies adopt one over the other?
Ive learnt a lot about the latest Submarines from your youtube videos thank you for your pro bono contribution to the National Security studies for many Cold War old relics such as myself with the esoteric submariner upgrades.
The benefit of having smaller none nuclear submarines in addition to the current RN sub fleet. Is simply better staff retention associated with increased promotion prospects. As well as providing the possibility of an active part time reserve force. There is also the added benefit of developing another submarine construction and servicing facility in England. increasing the specific skilled workforce and potential for export orders of none nuclear vessels. Historical locations such a Blyth on the North east coast come to mind. Perfectly located and once home to the famous or infamous 6th flotilla.
could you talk about background shipping noise and how it is expected to change in a major conflict with reduced commercial and more military shipping. Also are large scale noise "decoys', or more noise saturation devices a thing?
@HISutton Hmm, interesting analysis on the I-400 concept. Fast forward to modern times, though, and we can launch cruise and ballistic missiles from underwater, so why not drones? I can imagine maybe old ballistic missile submarines getting turned into "submerged aircraft carriers" for drones with them being launched from the missile tubes. Even large drones could maybe have a mechanism for folding their wings inside the missile tube so they don't take up much space, like aircraft on aircraft carriers. You could fit a lot of AirPower into those tubes! Drones could carry out multiple roles like recon, ASW, ground attack, etc. The problem then is of course retrieval. The only answer I have is that the drones would only be able to operate 1.) Within range of tanker aircraft so they could refuel and extend their range or 2.) within range of a US/allied airbase. Alternatively, someone could work on a mechanism for actually retrieving the drones from underwater, maybe a robot arm or something? Just going off the cuff, of course. Anybody who actually knows about these topics is welcome to chime in.
Awesome video mate! Can't wait for the next one, As the Akula sub is part of your logo is it one of your favourites? Would love to see a list of what's your favourite subs based on looks entirely? For me, I like the look of Russian subs due to the sail design with the bow planes, like the Akula for instance!
Is a trickle charge very low Mwatt reactor of quietish natural recirculating coolant as a primary patrol power source. Hotel load + silent running at say 5 or 6 kts. With solid state li ion batteries + primary Diesel for deployment is it a viable concept?
Apparently the 212CD adds 1000 tons submerged, up from 1800 on the A. I'd argue it really shouldn't be called a 212 at all, especially considering things like the 216 and 218SG exist.
In my view the I-400 class suffered from temporal dislocation, vis a vis its best matched weapon system. Rather than abandon a few M6A floatplanes to the vagaries of weather and allied AA fire, why not pack the hangar with the MXY7-22 Manned Cruise Missile? Bet you could fit six of those in the hangar. The Mod22 had the turbojet sustainer motor meant to give the first generation guided cruise missile a 22 km range. "For the emperor-who has no culpability for this war! No-really!" Opinion: That's a crappy battle cry, imo. At least Roosevelt and Truman admitted to approval of-and responsibility for- war plans. In Japan, however, the buck stopped well short of the top. Why do I make the point? Hard to understand why Japanese pilots, sailors, and soldiers would willingly die for a man who was against the war from the start. Imagine being enshrined in Yasukuni for defying the emperor's wishes. Think about it a minute. It'd be like dying for any public figure who has washed his hands of your fate. Like sacrificing your life for Josephine the Plumber, the Culligan Man, or the Tidybowl Man. The Japanese are far too pragmatic for that. You die for the emperor because you think you are doing what he expects of you. Not for any other reason.
That was off-topic but completely fair IMO. So many Japanese died from that fanatical devotion and the lies told about what the Americans would do to them as POWs.
I don't think that is the only factor either- there's enough radically different styles of submarine hunting. Due to so much classified on this, you can only point to general traits with much certainty. A submarine design focused on hunting ballistic missile subs vs hunting defensive subs, subs utilizing undersea detection networks in home waters, fleet protection subs, and so on. You could easily have a situation of an on paper terrible submarine class perfectly fit the situation and doctrine and give no chance to generally very effective subs. Speed for example could be critical or inconsequential. Same for dive depth, sonar, so on. Endurance somewhat for most, but still not all. And 'good sonar', towed? Passive? Active? Its cones of coverage? That's what makes it all interesting though. With use we can work out some things about them at least. We just take the general clues and assume they've done a reasonably competent job.
Ooohh ooh please Sir!!!! You don't have to surface to launch a UCAV. A lifting body ("wingless") UCAV - could possibly be launched underwater - the advantage being few protuberences like wings that would need toresit hydrodynamic forces. Disposable rocket booster to get it out of the water. Recovery is an exercise for the reader :-). Actually that's doable too. You have ballast tanks (or bladders) to make it neutrally bouyant - ballast tanks woiuldn't have to be heavy, and they would not need to be able to be "blown" like the ballast tank on a sub, they culd be pumped out once recovered, using external pumps. The UCAV effectively ditches then sinks itself a certain depth and "hovers"in the oggin. The mother sub can then pick it up, possibly with the aid of a smaller ROV. The bigger question is what would you use it for that you can't use a missile for? If it could communicate back to the sub in flight there'd be lots of things you could use it for. But without in flight comms - and Id guess you wouldnt want your sub at periscope depth with an antenna up for the duration of a flight - then i'd say there's little you can use it for that a non recoverable missle can't already do.
Tomahawks have wings and they are launched from the torpedo tube. It's possible to launch a communications buoy where the upper part is an antenna for satellite link and the lower section contains a speaker for sending data to the sub. The sub would not control the craft, that would be done from the base via satellite, just like any other drone.
I don't know about the expert, Mr. Sutton, but The Hunt for Red October is actually only my 3rd favorite submarine movie. I am guessing that either my 1st or 2nd favorite submarine movie might be his first. My first is Das Boot (1981 movie and 1985 for the longer mini-series: both are made with the same source material), although strictly speaking it is the mini-series that is my favorite which may not count as a movie. My second favorite submarine movie is Crimson Tide (1995). Red October comes in as 3rd because I think its story is a little far-fetched at points, especially the role of Jack Ryan seems too contrived. Never seen a submarine movie that comes close to any of these three.
Going back almost 40 years my diesel/electric submarine Hms Oynx traveled down to the Falklans war & completed duties the nuclear boats also down there could not do ie inshore surveillance, transfer of equipment/personnel& resupply for sas/sbs.
Ehm, you really SHOULD make the "top 5" thing a chapter of its own, otherwise anyone looking for that will think this was nothing but fake clickbait. Also, i would say that it is wrong to state "overall nuclear submarines are more capable", because that isn't true. Nuclear submarines have more/ADDITIONAL capabilities, but that lets them do additional things, it does not make them better at their primary tasks. For example. Nuclear subs have longer "hangtime", which means they can be on patrol for longer, but this does not make them better at actually finding and sinking targets. You can have 3 SSKs for the same pricetag, and as long as patrol area isn't too far away, those 3 will provide more reliable "on patrol" time. Nuclear subs have greater speed capability, sure, but when are they going to actually USE that higher speed? If they use it, they make it blindingly obvious where they are to any other subs or ASW forces nearby. Essentially, SSNs are great for empires with farflung patrol regions to reach and cover, especially in peacetime when they can travel at higher speeds and it doesn't matter if they are detected. However, nuclear subs are also overall easier to detect, considerably so even, compared to a modern SSK. And what is the most important part for a submarine? Stay hidden as much as possible. Meaning that the absolute baseline mission for ALL submarines, SSKs are better at it. Basically, if you put SSN vs SSK 1 on 1, the SSN needs something like 20 year tech advantage or a notably better crew, or they are unlikely to win. Or as someone i know likes to exaggerate it, a Virginia class sounds like a freighttrain with flattened wheels while their Gotland class mimics a very shy mosquito. ... Regarding a UCAV carrier, that is probably a nonstarter, as the only realistic option seems to be to treat the UCAVs as single use. Though it might be possible to keep and launch such through something like a VLS, ie from a sub that would look more like SSBN, but needing to be on the surface or close makes this of even more questionable value. What MIGHT be a more useful idea would be to have a VLS like launchsystem in the sail for UAVs(and as long as the size of the UAV is kept small-ish, it should be possible to also fit a retrieval system in the sail). One of the biggest issues for subs tend to be the ability to recon at greater distances. Especially for launching missiles. But if you can send a UAV to get targeting data? Should be possible to double or triple effective range at least. Of course, it also means the sub will have to radiate, which is really bad, but situationally at least it might be useful. And with small UAVs and the launch system in the sail, the sub should be able to stay mostly submerged even when launching and then be able to dive enough to only keep masts above surface. Not the best idea perhaps, but potentially situationally useful at least.
I think submersible vls uav’s are pretty futuristic for the time being A more practical alternative could be to have unmanned submersible drones that rise to the surface and act as spotters and maybe sonar relays
@@dj_koen1265 "I think submersible vls uav’s are pretty futuristic for the time being" Agreed. They can easily be done as is now, but not with functionality suitable for use by a submarine. "A more practical alternative could be to have unmanned submersible drones that rise to the surface and act as spotters and maybe sonar relays" Such UUVs exist. They also tend to rely on being tethered with a C4 cable to avoid either having to radiate. Which in turn limits their range from the submarine. It works well within limitations, but isn't really that effective.
Concerning the Typ 212A: the export model is called Type 214. The difference is Type 212A is built with antimagnetic steel, Type 214 is built with ferromagnetic steel, so it is vulnerable to magnetic mines. This technology is not being exported.
If you mean export of the technology of amagnetic steel itself, that is not true. German company sold the know-how to a polish shipyard for a series of small minehunters.
US Navy has no need to develop AIP SSK . Simple reason is that our NATO and Asian Allies already have those boats, fullfilling that capability. However US Navy should make arrangements for US Nav officers and selected enlisted to train on AIP SSK boats.
@@spyran5839 The opposite might be true. If certain situations came about, the US might want to send a bunch of massive mini-sub tenders to the vicinity of Taiwan, for instance.
36:07 "... not like a lot of other, --- armies and navies." Coward! Probably very sensibly so in this day and age, of internet knee-jerk mindless indignation and virtue signaling. But nonetheless, I definitely heard you not saying stuff, there!!
Reckon for current generation SSKs, the Type 212/214/216/218/Dolphin2 family are very capable, and it will be hard to grade them, though the nuclear-armed Dolphins will be the most dangerous. The Lada.. may likely be trumped by the later versions of the Type 039 Yuan, which are in series production. I suspect the PLAN had a good look at the Kilos they bought before coming up with the Yuan requirements. Submarine UCAV? Nah... imposible... www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/31121/how-the-ohio-class-guided-missile-sub-was-born-and-why-theyre-much-more-than-meets-the-eye
Type 039 Yuan is a large family. There are 7 different variants according to amateur observers. www.eric-genevelle.fr/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/China-Revision-of-the-Type-039-English.pdf The first Yuans were considered to be between improved Kilos and normal Kilos by a lot of observers and the US released public statements. There are especially massive differences between the 3rd and 4th variants. It seems the difference is also huge between the 6th and 7th. It is safe to guess China surpassed the improved Kilo. Yuan also has AIP which the Lada lacks.
Stumbled over your channel a few weeks ago. Now I saw nearly all vids you did so far. Huge respect for your work. looking for the future to come.
This channel is an absolute wealth of quality information.
I ran across him 2 weeks ago. Unbelievable amount of information.
It's so happy seeing one of my favorite creators (and kept me liking subs even more) actually doing these. :)
9:40 Its hillarious how quickly this statement got outdated.
Well, substitute The Netherlands for Australia and it's current again. ;)
It didn't get outdated at all. Australia was the only customer at the time.
So happy you have made another video! and a long one! Thanks!
What was the best submarine movie?
Das Boot!
Das boot. Second place Hostile waters. Rest are more or less meh. Operation petticoat as comedy goes, or periscopes up. Maybe Enemy below...
The idea of double shotting your torpedo tube is fascinating, it's like going back to the age of sail where they would be standard either double or triple shot their guns (having two or three cannon balls in the gun, to increase number of rounds)
Great work, glad to see you on RUclips.
Do you see more use of active sonar as sacrificial UUVs proliferate and, possibly, more subs are designed as motherships for them?
Just recently came upon your channel. Always interesting and informative.
My dad, Jesse J. Bryant Chief electrician U.S.N. Atlantic submarines 1946-67 and I was Advance boiler technician U.S.S.GRIDLEY CG-21 ACC/ABC L.M.E.T
6YO 10-17-84. Stay safe 🙏 ❤️.
Bravo! Truly incredible presentation! Thank you.
Great information and thanks for the time taken to answer the questions...
Amazing drawings yet again! Love this channel, fascinating stuff
Really awesome content! Top quality and the format is just right, and above all super informative as always! Can't wait for the next one.
In addition to lower flow noise there is also lower low-frequency "beat noise" from when the screw blades cross the flow turbulence/discontinuity from the sail. For example for a 5-blade screw turning at 200 rpm a blades will cross the sail wake 5*200/60 = 17 times/second. The resulting low-frequency noise travels very well in the deep ocean, and the US exploited this to great effect against Soviet submarines in the cold way.
Skewback screws are less susceptible, but not immune. Pumpjets are much less susceptible and tend to move the frequency up to higher frequencies where it doesn't travel as well.
The problem with non-nuclear subs is that they have very limited strategic mobility and are therefore best suited to operating areas close to their bases, but the US is deemed to have no such operating areas. You could argue that the US could forward base flotillas of SSKs in, say, Japan and some Baltic state[s], but at that point why not just let those allies focus on SSKs themselves? What could a US SSK do that the very advanced Japanese fleet can't?
wrt special mission subs, I think that Jimmy Carter is a golden example of a UUV mothership along the lines that you discussed at the start of the video. The Russians place a larger emphasis on manned submarines like Losharik for seabed work, but the US has largely gone UUV-centric since the retirement of NR-1 and the DSRVs.
Barracuda SSK didn't age that well.
Kinda - depends if they find a new buyer
It aged fine, the boats are good.
Great presentation especially of the best SSKs. The presentation on the ROKN newest anticipated SSG was quite informative as well.
Many of the questions were quite good and showed considerable thought.
Loved Hunt for Red October...Whats the number 1 sub movie??
Crimson tide
@@gregorybentley5707 Not worth watching. Stale story of mutiniy, good acters though.
Das boot
19:42 I think the suction effect might have to do with the pressure differential near the surface, which is much greater than at depth. For every 10 meters you go down, one atmosphere is added. So this is linear. However that means that between 0 and 10 meters, there is a doubling of the pressure. Between 10 and 20 meters, it's just 50% more. Etc etc etc. More pressure pushing against the lower part of the submarine than against the higher part will exert a net force in an upward direction.
However, if this is taken into account in how the sub is controlled (in a modern sub I assume there's even a "fly-by-wire" system in place), I guess that it should be manageable.
Edit: nevermind, I forgot Archimedes. The upward force acting upon a body in water is equal to the weight of the water displaced. So depth does not play a role.
It's becoming increasingly clear why the US wants Australia to acquire nuclear subs. I love your term 'nuclear mafia'.
What’s the best submarine movie?
Das boot
What's strange is that Australians seem to think Japanese submarines are crap while their Collins class submarines are at top of the heap.
Don't know where you got that impression. We admire the Japanese subs and though seriously about acquiring them. As for the Collins we are just happy that they arent as crap as first thought. It will be interesting to see how AUKUS turns out. The plan is to get worked up on a couple of US nuclear subs before building the Astute class in Australia. HypoHystericalHistory has a detailed and long ( 2hr) rundown on the program.
@@daniellarge9784 RE: "Don't know where you got that impression. We admire the Japanese subs..."
Based on social media comments regarding how Japanese subs were inferior to Collins and other conventional subs.
Do you consider The Wrath Of Khan to be a submarine movie? At least the Mutara Nebula bit?
No. Definitely not!
Wrath of Khan would be a cruiser vs frigate, maybe in a storm.
Submarine episode is “Balance of Terror!
Super cool! Thanks!
I LOVE your channel. Thanks for all your hard work!
If Red October is the 2nd best sub movie, do you consider Das Boot the best?
Thanks!
Yes, Das Boot of course. No other answer would be acceptable. In German with subtitles too, ideally the TV series
ahhh Das Boot. I'm glad I found someone else asking.
The way the sail can act as a hydrofoil and make the sub flip upside down suddenly could be tactically really useful if your submarine was ever being attacked by a lion, because then you could roll upside down and play dead, making the lion lose interest and allowing you to make your escape quickly.
So, that could be a plus, I feel, a feature or selling point, when listing the suite of self defense options a sub has.
Great presentation as always. Thank you for that. If I may, I do think that I-400 types Subs would be very important for any Navy. F-35s operating from a Submarine would be a formidable weapon platform.
The JULIETT and ECHO I/II SSGs and SSGNs were launch platforms for ASCMs, but had the same problem as the REGULUS I and II shooters.
SUTTON mate you need a better microphone!
(anything dynamic will do)
Yeah certainly
What should be your first favourite submarine movie?
Love your videos by the way, super interesting
Das Boot
make a modern periscope doc please
Really enjoyed that - thank you
23:42 while having some sort of AIP sub would expand the USN's capabilities, its much easier to offload that work onto other NATO or NATO alligned(Sweden and Japan) countries. This would manage some of the problems the US would face if they attempted to field AIP/litoral subs themselves. Most importantly the infastructure. The countries that already have these types of subs are much closer to potential areas of operation where the subs would be needed which would get around the need for the US to foward deploy the necessary support staff and materials to either Europe or the Pacific. Also it aviods the politics of building conventional subs in US yards, which would probably result in a significant reduction or outright cancelation of the Virginia Class. Which would effectivley offset any gains in capabilities made by the introduction of litoral subs. This is also incredibly unlikely, especailly now with the news that the USN and RN will provide Australia with Nuclear powered attack submarines. I feel like going foward the US and UK should look more to allys to support more niche combat operations(Special Warfare, litoral combat, etc). While the RN, USN, and even MN focus on larger scale blue water operations and strategic sealift
What is MN?
Q: Anti-sub work was traditionally done with surface vessels, why is it now done with other subs? Are they better at it or is it cost (no need for AAW)?
At 33:25 (about X-form control surfaces) you state: "... if one of them jams...".
If you think about it there's still some control up-down and left-right if ALL BUT one jams. Enough to limp back to base. That's a huge level of redundancy!
Great content! Certainly learnt quite a bit from this video!
I have one topic in mind and hopefully you can explain them in the next Q&A session: Fairwater Planes vs Bow Planes - why some navies adopt one over the other?
Great video...👍👍
Ive learnt a lot about the latest Submarines from your youtube videos thank you for your pro bono contribution to the National Security studies for many Cold War old relics such as myself with the esoteric submariner upgrades.
The benefit of having smaller none nuclear submarines in addition to the current RN sub fleet. Is simply better staff retention associated with increased promotion prospects. As well as providing the possibility of an active part time reserve force. There is also the added benefit of developing another submarine construction and servicing facility in England. increasing the specific skilled workforce and potential for export orders of none nuclear vessels. Historical locations such a Blyth on the North east coast come to mind. Perfectly located and once home to the famous or infamous 6th flotilla.
Is your site down? I tried it stated connection rejected/ can not be reached.
could you talk about background shipping noise and how it is expected to change in a major conflict with reduced commercial and more military shipping. Also are large scale noise "decoys', or more noise saturation devices a thing?
Do Submarines have a fatigue life on the hull, what are the main reasons for withdrawal or scraping ?
Some nice renderings, btw.
@HISutton Hmm, interesting analysis on the I-400 concept. Fast forward to modern times, though, and we can launch cruise and ballistic missiles from underwater, so why not drones? I can imagine maybe old ballistic missile submarines getting turned into "submerged aircraft carriers" for drones with them being launched from the missile tubes. Even large drones could maybe have a mechanism for folding their wings inside the missile tube so they don't take up much space, like aircraft on aircraft carriers. You could fit a lot of AirPower into those tubes! Drones could carry out multiple roles like recon, ASW, ground attack, etc.
The problem then is of course retrieval. The only answer I have is that the drones would only be able to operate 1.) Within range of tanker aircraft so they could refuel and extend their range or 2.) within range of a US/allied airbase.
Alternatively, someone could work on a mechanism for actually retrieving the drones from underwater, maybe a robot arm or something? Just going off the cuff, of course. Anybody who actually knows about these topics is welcome to chime in.
Wasn’t that a shocker that Australia canceled their order with France.
Yup, pay me a lot of money and get a submarine in 50 years.
instead of sailles subs what about just smaller ones would that be viable?
Do a show on Australia new subs. And also the unmanned subs/drones.
Awesome video mate! Can't wait for the next one,
As the Akula sub is part of your logo is it one of your favourites?
Would love to see a list of what's your favourite subs based on looks entirely? For me, I like the look of Russian subs due to the sail design with the bow planes, like the Akula for instance!
That's the Sierra (teeth are a dead giveaway).
What is the best submarine movie? If Hunt for red October is number 2?
yeah but when you use optic cables or cameras on periscope you can make it very long sort of tube in tube anyway to avoid suction at periscope depth
Is a trickle charge very low Mwatt reactor of quietish natural recirculating coolant as a primary patrol power source. Hotel load + silent running at say 5 or 6 kts. With solid state li ion batteries + primary Diesel for deployment is it a viable concept?
How effective is India's SMART vis-a-vis chinese navy in IOR or SCS ??
Malaysian Navy does have a DSRV. The host ship is MV Mega Bakti. Superb video. Ordered your 'World Submarine' and am keen, awaiting its arrival.
There is not enough coverage of the JMSDF, pls. can you do an episode.
15:25
16:24 you missed letter "D" in "severoDvinsk"
Apparently the 212CD adds 1000 tons submerged, up from 1800 on the A. I'd argue it really shouldn't be called a 212 at all, especially considering things like the 216 and 218SG exist.
In my view the I-400 class suffered from temporal dislocation, vis a vis its best matched weapon system. Rather than abandon a few M6A floatplanes to the vagaries of weather and allied AA fire, why not pack the hangar with the MXY7-22 Manned Cruise Missile? Bet you could fit six of those in the hangar. The Mod22 had the turbojet sustainer motor meant to give the first generation guided cruise missile a 22 km range.
"For the emperor-who has no culpability for this war! No-really!"
Opinion:
That's a crappy battle cry, imo. At least Roosevelt and Truman admitted to approval of-and responsibility for- war plans. In Japan, however, the buck stopped well short of the top.
Why do I make the point? Hard to understand why Japanese pilots, sailors, and soldiers would willingly die for a man who was against the war from the start. Imagine being enshrined in Yasukuni for defying the emperor's wishes.
Think about it a minute. It'd be like dying for any public figure who has washed his hands of your fate. Like sacrificing your life for Josephine the Plumber, the Culligan Man, or the Tidybowl Man. The Japanese are far too pragmatic for that. You die for the emperor because you think you are doing what he expects of you. Not for any other reason.
That was off-topic but completely fair IMO. So many Japanese died from that fanatical devotion and the lies told about what the Americans would do to them as POWs.
I think it's very hard to actually judge how good anti submarine capabilities are because the capabilities of the Sonar a hard to judge.
I don't think that is the only factor either- there's enough radically different styles of submarine hunting. Due to so much classified on this, you can only point to general traits with much certainty. A submarine design focused on hunting ballistic missile subs vs hunting defensive subs, subs utilizing undersea detection networks in home waters, fleet protection subs, and so on.
You could easily have a situation of an on paper terrible submarine class perfectly fit the situation and doctrine and give no chance to generally very effective subs.
Speed for example could be critical or inconsequential. Same for dive depth, sonar, so on. Endurance somewhat for most, but still not all.
And 'good sonar', towed? Passive? Active? Its cones of coverage?
That's what makes it all interesting though. With use we can work out some things about them at least. We just take the general clues and assume they've done a reasonably competent job.
Ooohh ooh please Sir!!!!
You don't have to surface to launch a UCAV. A lifting body ("wingless") UCAV - could possibly be launched underwater - the advantage being few protuberences like wings that would need toresit hydrodynamic forces.
Disposable rocket booster to get it out of the water.
Recovery is an exercise for the reader :-).
Actually that's doable too. You have ballast tanks (or bladders) to make it neutrally bouyant - ballast tanks woiuldn't have to be heavy, and they would not need to be able to be "blown" like the ballast tank on a sub, they culd be pumped out once recovered, using external pumps.
The UCAV effectively ditches then sinks itself a certain depth and "hovers"in the oggin.
The mother sub can then pick it up, possibly with the aid of a smaller ROV.
The bigger question is what would you use it for that you can't use a missile for?
If it could communicate back to the sub in flight there'd be lots of things you could use it for.
But without in flight comms - and Id guess you wouldnt want your sub at periscope depth with an antenna up for the duration of a flight - then i'd say there's little you can use it for that a non recoverable missle can't already do.
Tomahawks have wings and they are launched from the torpedo tube. It's possible to launch a communications buoy where the upper part is an antenna for satellite link and the lower section contains a speaker for sending data to the sub. The sub would not control the craft, that would be done from the base via satellite, just like any other drone.
Wait, if hunt for red october is 2nd favorite submarine movie, what is 1st?
I don't know about the expert, Mr. Sutton, but The Hunt for Red October is actually only my 3rd favorite submarine movie. I am guessing that either my 1st or 2nd favorite submarine movie might be his first. My first is Das Boot (1981 movie and 1985 for the longer mini-series: both are made with the same source material), although strictly speaking it is the mini-series that is my favorite which may not count as a movie. My second favorite submarine movie is Crimson Tide (1995). Red October comes in as 3rd because I think its story is a little far-fetched at points, especially the role of Jack Ryan seems too contrived. Never seen a submarine movie that comes close to any of these three.
If my favorite SSK isn't #1 I'm gonna be really really mad!
Going back almost 40 years my diesel/electric submarine Hms Oynx traveled down to the Falklans war & completed duties the nuclear boats also down there could not do ie inshore surveillance, transfer of equipment/personnel& resupply for sas/sbs.
2:44 "docks with a Russian submarine" i believe Red October was a Soviet submarine.
If The Hunt for Red October is supposed to be everyone's second favorite submarine film, what is supposed to be the first?
Down Periscope?
Das Boot i imagine
26:00 must be quiet effective otherwise navies wouldn't .....
Hold on there you never hear of LCS?
Not to mention the zumwalt class....
In this case is worldwide.
Ehm, you really SHOULD make the "top 5" thing a chapter of its own, otherwise anyone looking for that will think this was nothing but fake clickbait.
Also, i would say that it is wrong to state "overall nuclear submarines are more capable", because that isn't true.
Nuclear submarines have more/ADDITIONAL capabilities, but that lets them do additional things, it does not make them better at their primary tasks.
For example.
Nuclear subs have longer "hangtime", which means they can be on patrol for longer, but this does not make them better at actually finding and sinking targets. You can have 3 SSKs for the same pricetag, and as long as patrol area isn't too far away, those 3 will provide more reliable "on patrol" time.
Nuclear subs have greater speed capability, sure, but when are they going to actually USE that higher speed? If they use it, they make it blindingly obvious where they are to any other subs or ASW forces nearby.
Essentially, SSNs are great for empires with farflung patrol regions to reach and cover, especially in peacetime when they can travel at higher speeds and it doesn't matter if they are detected.
However, nuclear subs are also overall easier to detect, considerably so even, compared to a modern SSK. And what is the most important part for a submarine? Stay hidden as much as possible. Meaning that the absolute baseline mission for ALL submarines, SSKs are better at it.
Basically, if you put SSN vs SSK 1 on 1, the SSN needs something like 20 year tech advantage or a notably better crew, or they are unlikely to win.
Or as someone i know likes to exaggerate it, a Virginia class sounds like a freighttrain with flattened wheels while their Gotland class mimics a very shy mosquito.
...
Regarding a UCAV carrier, that is probably a nonstarter, as the only realistic option seems to be to treat the UCAVs as single use. Though it might be possible to keep and launch such through something like a VLS, ie from a sub that would look more like SSBN, but needing to be on the surface or close makes this of even more questionable value.
What MIGHT be a more useful idea would be to have a VLS like launchsystem in the sail for UAVs(and as long as the size of the UAV is kept small-ish, it should be possible to also fit a retrieval system in the sail).
One of the biggest issues for subs tend to be the ability to recon at greater distances. Especially for launching missiles. But if you can send a UAV to get targeting data? Should be possible to double or triple effective range at least.
Of course, it also means the sub will have to radiate, which is really bad, but situationally at least it might be useful.
And with small UAVs and the launch system in the sail, the sub should be able to stay mostly submerged even when launching and then be able to dive enough to only keep masts above surface.
Not the best idea perhaps, but potentially situationally useful at least.
I think submersible vls uav’s are pretty futuristic for the time being
A more practical alternative could be to have unmanned submersible drones that rise to the surface and act as spotters and maybe sonar relays
@@dj_koen1265 "I think submersible vls uav’s are pretty futuristic for the time being"
Agreed. They can easily be done as is now, but not with functionality suitable for use by a submarine.
"A more practical alternative could be to have unmanned submersible drones that rise to the surface and act as spotters and maybe sonar relays"
Such UUVs exist. They also tend to rely on being tethered with a C4 cable to avoid either having to radiate. Which in turn limits their range from the submarine.
It works well within limitations, but isn't really that effective.
SSK
Submersible Ship (k) Conventional. As SSC acronym was already used for something else.
SSN Submercible Ship Nuclear (powered) - Fast Attack boat. Virginia class, Astute class, Yasen class, Los Angeles class, Akula, 093 Type class.
SSBN Submercible Ship Ballistic (mIssile) Nuclear (powered). Boomer. Ohio class, Columbia class, Typhoo class, Borei class, Vanguard class,
SSBK (i.e. Golf class) Submercible Ship Ballistic (missile) conventionally powered. No longer used.
SSGN. Submercible Ship Guided (cruise missile) Nuclear (powered). Cruise missile submarine. Osar II, Ohip Refit SSGN.
It's easy to see why the subs can mate...it's rescue...but also an opining for attack
AFAIK Lada class doesn't have AIP.
Interesting
Australian Barracuda - that didn't aged so well now, isn't it
Lemme guess #1 favotrite submarije film is 'Crimson Tide' (1995) "GO BAMA"
Re: question 1 -- Call them "SSH" perhaps, for "Submarine, Host"?
Severodvinsk
Concerning the Typ 212A: the export model is called Type 214. The difference is Type 212A is built with antimagnetic steel, Type 214 is built with ferromagnetic steel, so it is vulnerable to magnetic mines. This technology is not being exported.
If you mean export of the technology of amagnetic steel itself, that is not true. German company sold the know-how to a polish shipyard for a series of small minehunters.
@@bogdanbogdanoff5164 then this has changed. But originally this was not the case
I don't think you can add attack class it wil be operational in 2035..
Australia not getting them now
US Navy has no need to develop AIP SSK . Simple reason is that our NATO and Asian Allies already have those boats, fullfilling that capability. However US Navy should make arrangements for US Nav officers and selected enlisted to train on AIP SSK boats.
Why would autonomous minisub tenders need to all be submarines? The same job could be done much more cheaply by vessels of destroyer size or smaller.
It's already done from ships, submarines and aircraft, and all three can recover them.
You might want to get the mini subs to their destination covertly.
@@spyran5839 The opposite might be true. If certain situations came about, the US might want to send a bunch of massive mini-sub tenders to the vicinity of Taiwan, for instance.
@@stcredzero But using pressure resistant drones in a secret mission would make stuff like cutting undersea cables on a large scale pretty easy
@@spyran5839 Sure, so have both. But then there would be a few covert tenders, and a lot of more cost effective ones!
Why not just use their German or Swedish dogs if they want AIP subs? Just say "Fetch".
36:07 "... not like a lot of other, --- armies and navies."
Coward! Probably very sensibly so in this day and age, of internet knee-jerk mindless indignation and virtue signaling. But nonetheless, I definitely heard you not saying stuff, there!!
Lada SSK is considered a failiure by Russian Navy.
Why is no nation brave enough to sell new subs to Taiwan ???
Reckon for current generation SSKs, the Type 212/214/216/218/Dolphin2 family are very capable, and it will be hard to grade them, though the nuclear-armed Dolphins will be the most dangerous.
The Lada.. may likely be trumped by the later versions of the Type 039 Yuan, which are in series production. I suspect the PLAN had a good look at the Kilos they bought before coming up with the Yuan requirements.
Submarine UCAV? Nah... imposible...
www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/31121/how-the-ohio-class-guided-missile-sub-was-born-and-why-theyre-much-more-than-meets-the-eye
Type 039 Yuan is a large family. There are 7 different variants according to amateur observers.
www.eric-genevelle.fr/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/China-Revision-of-the-Type-039-English.pdf
The first Yuans were considered to be between improved Kilos and normal Kilos by a lot of observers and the US released public statements. There are especially massive differences between the 3rd and 4th variants. It seems the difference is also huge between the 6th and 7th. It is safe to guess China surpassed the improved Kilo. Yuan also has AIP which the Lada lacks.