AIP vs nuclear submarines

[gambit]

Yes...The Z is more advanced than all current ship designs because of 'stealth' shaping and various internal technologies such as all electric propulsion, computer, automation, gunnery, and many others.

 

[500]

There is................

A diesel sub even with AIP will quickly run out of fuel if it carries 20 ICBMs like R 39.

Plus such sub will have to be very big as the diesel engine will have to be very powerful thus big and heavy.

Thus going for diesel you will get subs which is perhaps larger than even typhoon but very limited in range; this defeats the very idea of safe near continuous strategic deterrence.

There is no any problem to make a large diesel submarine. Simply there is no need.

In order to make a nuclear submarine quiet u have to make it very large and thus expensive.
Diesel submarine can be quiet even being small and thus relatively cheap.

However ICBM submarine must be large and expensive. So there is no point to make it diesel, since its already large and expensive.

 

[500]

Aaah now i get an idea. But why Zumwalt the most advanced? Due to stealth or the technology in it?

+ very low radar signature.
+ very low acoustic signature.
+ high level of automation (Zumwalt has a crew of 140, while Arleigh Burke - 323).
+ advanced gun systems.

- lack of zonal air defence.
- price.

 

[Penguin]

That's nice explanation but, a diesel/ AIP sub can not carry missiles like R 39 with 10 MIRV warheads and 8,300 KM range, so SSBN will be unrivaled in that context.

Why not? See Russian/Soviet Golf class
Golf-class submarine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There is................

A diesel sub even with AIP will quickly run out of fuel if it carries 20 ICBMs like R 39.

Plus such sub will have to be very big as the diesel engine will have to be very powerful thus big and heavy.

Thus going for diesel you will get subs which is perhaps larger than even typhoon but very limited in range; this defeats the very idea of safe near continuous strategic deterrence.

Still, there is no technical barrier, only operational. Of course, this is why SBBN was invented in the frst place ....

Best AIP sub (212) costs about 500-600 mln, best nuclear sub (Virgina) - about 1.8 bln .


No. Modern nuclear submarines are virtually not detectable at slow speeds.


Actual depth are classified but I guess the difference is much bigger. And 214 is not improved 212, quite the opposite.


Thats silliest part of the article. Nuclear subs dont have a cruise speed, since their range is unlimited. They can travel at any speed up to 30+ knots they want as much as they want. Of course at high speeds they are noisy so maximum silent speed of modern submarine is about 20 knots.

AIP submarine has cruise speed of about 4 knots. In order to travel faster it needs to use either accumulators, which drain as fast as smartphones or shnorkel, which is noisy as hell and cant be used at depths or bad weather.

PLus, at high speeds, the sub is essentially blind as sonars will be useless.

Wouldnt the upper portion, the building thing, have a bigger cross section? It is hardly different from the ship above?

shaping causes radar energy to be reflected away from the enemy's radar emittor, thus reducing radar visibility.

 

[surya kiran]

@Penguin @Capt.Popeye @Imran Khan @Manticore @Nihonjin1051 and navy types... why cannot a nuclear sub have electric motors which enable it to go silent like diesel electric go silent while under water? Is this acheivable? Sorry if this sounds very obviously ridiculous?

 

[Superboy]

AIP is better. Nuclear subs are loud.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

@Penguin @Capt.Popeye @Imran Khan @Manticore @Nihonjin1051 and navy types... why cannot a nuclear sub have electric motors which enable it to go silent like diesel electric go silent while under water? Is this acheivable? Sorry if this sounds very obviously ridiculous?

Of course that is possible. The Steam Turbine that is driven by the Reactor steam can charge batteries (through a Turbo-Alternator) that can run an auxiliary cruising motor. This arrangement has already been incorporated on some Russian Subs.

Also one thing that we must not lose sight of; AIP is not any "magic wand", it only allows a conventional Sub longer intervals between Snorkelling or "Snorting". Apart from that, AIP only allows the Sub to lurk; it will not allow the SSK to stalk or chase its target. OTOH, while the Nuclear Sub is marginally noisier, it can dive much deeper; thus allowing it reduce its vulnerability. Apart from that, it can "crank up" to its full operational speed at will.
Therefore: both Propulsion Systems have their pluses and minuses.

 

[vsdave2302]

well i dont think so you can find any sub below 800 million dollars these days.
india is giving a tender of 6 billion dollars for 6 subs.
reason is developmental costs not the actual cost of construction.

It depends a lot on what you want on your platform. India has some highly specific requirement which makes the acquisitions very costly.

 

[surya kiran]

Of course that is possible. The Steam Turbine that is driven by the Reactor steam can charge batteries (through a Turbo-Alternator) that can run an auxiliary cruising motor. This arrangement has already been incorporated on some Russian Subs.

Also one thing that we must not lose sight of; AIP is not any "magic wand", it only allows a conventional Sub longer intervals between Snorkelling or "Snorting". Apart from that, AIP only allows the Sub to lurk; it will not allow the SSK to stalk or chase its target. OTOH, while the Nuclear Sub is marginally noisier, it can dive much deeper; thus allowing it reduce its vulnerability. Apart from that, it can "crank up" to its full operational speed at will.
Therefore: both Propulsion Systems have their pluses and minuses.

So the motors in the SSN can be shut off while it runs on batteries, giving it the ability to be more silent?

 

[Capt.Popeye]

So the motors in the SSN can be shut off while it runs on batteries, giving it the ability to be more silent?

Yes; the Steam Turbine Propulsion can be shut down and the Reactor Power reduced (not shut down) while the cruising motor runs the sub.

 

[greatone]

Can't we put both a diesel engine and a nuclear reactor on the same sub, allowing it to switch between the modes as the situation demands ?

It will certainly give more tactical flexibility.
Or will that increase the size too much ?

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Can't we put both a diesel engine and a nuclear reactor on the same sub, allowing it to switch between the modes as the situation demands ?

It will certainly give more tactical flexibility.
Or will that increase the size too much ?

Not practical at all, humongous size and cost issues are involved.

 

[Penguin]

@Penguin @Capt.Popeye @Imran Khan @Manticore @Nihonjin1051 and navy types... why cannot a nuclear sub have electric motors which enable it to go silent like diesel electric go silent while under water? Is this acheivable? Sorry if this sounds very obviously ridiculous?

I'm sure a nuclear sub can also employ electrical motor, but it will still have the - relatively - loud cooling system of the nuclear reactor

 

[rockstar08]

A navy must have both i guess

 

[Super Falcon]

Why germany dont build nuke subs they have nuke tech