What do you mean---when you say---" You are suggesting an SSK cannot deal with an SSN "----and what is this "HA"---did you have a cough or a hiccup---
Earlier you stated: "212 and 214 are not hunter killer subs against the nuc subs---they are good against any kind of surface ship or any other non nuc sub--- hunter killer mean that you have the ability to track, follow and match the move of the adversary---which in this case is the non nucs---the diesels are limited in their in their stealth speed over a long peiriod of time."
Maybe I've not understood correctly, but it appears to me that it means you believe SS/SSKs [non-nuclear powered hunter killer subs] like 212A and 214 cannot deal with (i.e. "find & kill", "search & destroy) an SSN.
Clearly, SS/SSKs are not meant for open ocean ASW. And in open ocean ASW SSN will always have the advantage. But the implication is that the most likely place where an SSN and an SS/SSK would meet is at the SS/SSKs 'home turf' - the (in some cases rather extended) coastal/littoral area, where waters are comparatively shallow. And in this environment, the SSKs rather than the SSNs have the advantage.
"SSK and SSN are both attack submarines, but with different propulsion systems"
It is not as simplistic as you are putting it to be---you need to invest in a little more input.
I'm not saying SSKs and SSNs are identical but for the type of propulsion systems they have. On the other hand, it is really a rather big mistake to assume modern SS/SSKs are any less capable in ASW than are SSNs.
Who do you think you are to be telling me what I need to invest in? After all, you have no way of knowing what input I have or have not had.
Four types of military submarines generally are in use, in addition to science and research subs.
Ballistic-missile submarines (SSBN):
Guided missile submarines (SSG/SSGN):
Attack submarines (SS/SSN):
Coastal submarines (SSC/SSK):
Pacific Fleet commander: Sub threats top priority | Stars and Stripes
SS/SSN > Multimission vessel, Can be nuclear or diesel/aip powered.
SS would include Argentinian Santa Cruz class, Russian Kilo class, Dutch Zwaardvis and Walrus classes, Australian Collins class. All are well over 2000 ton surfaced and well over 2500 ton submerged. All are diesel-electric powered, with only Collins prepared for insertion of AIP:
SS Argentine's TR-1700 Santa Cruz Displacement: 2116 tonnes (Surfaced) 2264 tonnes (Submerged)
SS Zwaardvis class (Netherlands) Displacement: 2408 tonnes (Surfaced), 2640 tonnes (Submerged)
SS Hai Lung class (Taiwan, mod-Zwaardvis) Displacement: 2376 tonnes (Surfaced), 2660 tonnes (Submerged)
SS Walrus class (Netherlands) Displacement: 2,350 t surfaced, 2,650 t submerged
SS Collins class (Australia) Displacement: 3,051 tonnes (surfaced), 3,353 tonnes (submerged)
SS Kilo class Displacement: Surfaced: 2,300-2,350 tons, Submerged:3,000-4,000 tons full load
In this bracket one also finds the projected AIP powered Project 677 Лада (Lada): Displacement: 2,700 long tons (2,700 t) submerged
Now, consider what in German service the Type 212A is replacing: the Type 206(A), which clearly is an SSC/SSK, just like the Type 205/207 and Type 201 before it and the Israely Gal class.
Gal class (Type 540, modified 206) Displacement: 420 tonnes (Surfaced) 600 tonnes (Submerged)
Type 206A submarine Displacement: 450 t, surfaced; 498 t, submerged
Type 207 Kobben class, Norway (mod 205, sold to Denmark - Tumleren class - and Poland - Bielik class) 430 surfaced, 459 submerged
Type 205 / Denmark Narhvalen class Displacement: 453 t surfaced 509 t submerged
Type 201 U-boat Displacement: 450 t, surfaced; 500 t, submerged
The Type 205 is a direct evolution of the Type 201 class with lengthened hull, new machinery and sensors. The biggest difference though is that ST-52 steel is used for the pressure hull since the Type 201's non-magnetic steel proved to be problematic. Type 206, the follow-on class, finally succeeded with non-magnetic steel hulls.
These were all dinky little boats, optimized for the Baltic. A larger set of SSC/SSK are Swedish and Norwegian in origin:
Nacken class, Sweden Displacement: 980 tonnes (Surfaced), 1150 tonnes (Submerged)
Västergötland, Sweden Displacement: 1070 tonnes (Surfaced), 1150 tonnes (Submerged)
Ula class, Norway (German Type 210) Displacement: Surface: 1,040 tons. Submerged: 1,150 tons
Gotland class, Sweden Displacement: 1494 tonnes (Surfaced), 1599 tonnes (Submerged)
Similar in size to these is: Daphne class (France, Pakistan) Displacement: 860 tonnes surfaced, 1,038 tonnes submerged. The successor Agosta 90B class is substantially bigger. Surface displacement: 1,500 long tons, Submerged displacement: 1,760 long tons (France, Spain) / 2,050 long tons (Pakistan). Scorpene has Surface Displacement 1,450t, Submerged Displacement 1,590t
Clearly in the SSK/SSC bracket is the new AIP powered Russian Project 950 Амур Amur with a displacement of 950 long tons (970 t) surfaced (1150 m3 Normal displacement). However, the Project 1650 Амур Amur is more similar to Agosta 90B and Scorpene in size: 1765 m3 Normal displacement.
Next, consider the ubiquitous Type 209, the export hit. Five variants of this submarine have been produced, which show its evolution from a coastal to a more open water orientation:
Type 209/1100 Displacement (submerged) 1,207 t (Greece: 4)
Type 209/1200 Displacement (submerged) 1,285 t (Columbia: 2, Greece: 4, Peru: 6, S.Korea: 9, Turkey: 6)
Type 209/1300 Displacement (submerged) 1,390 t (Equador: 2, Indonesia: 2, Venezuela: 2)
Type 209/1400 Displacement (submerged) 1,586 t (Brazil: 3, Chili: 2, Turkey: 4)
Type 209/1500 Displacement (submerged) 1,810 t (India: 4)
Now, lets consider Type 212A and Type 214 itself
Type 212A Displacement: 1'450 tonnes surfaced, 1'830 tonnes submerged
Type 214 Displacement: 1,700 t surfaced / 1,980 t submerged (GR) / 1,860 t submerged (SK)
This is similar in size to e.g. the Chinese Song and Ming classes of SS, with Ming as the lower and Song as the upper end of the Bracket. And to the Israeli Dolphin class.
Type 035 Ming class (mod-USSR Romeo class) Displacement: 1,475 tons surfaced, 1,830 tons submerged
Dolphin class Displacement: 1,640 tons surfaced, 1,900 tons submerged
Type 039 Song class Displacement: 2,250 tons submerged
IMHO just looking at the relative sizes and growth in displacement over time, it would be a mistake to write off the Type 212A as 'coastal'. This sub was developed not just for the Baltic (i.e. German service) but also for the Mediterranean (i.e. Italian service). The Mediterranean Sea has an average depth of 1,500 metres (4,920 ft) and the deepest recorded point is 5,267 metres (about 3.27 miles) in the Calypso Deep in the Ionian Sea. It covers an approximate area of 2.5 million km². By comparison, the maximum depth of the Baltic Sea is 459 m (1506 ft). The surface area is about 377,000 km² (145,522 sq mi). Two very different environments. The addition of Italian requirements led to the original 212 design being abandoned in favor of a modified 212
A. Particularly Type 214 is more SS than SSK, considering improvements in endurance over 212A. Looking at
all post-war German subs, only the TR-1700 is larger than Type 214. These are clearly closer to what an SS is than to what an SSC/K used to be.
Finally, a bit on the capability of russian subs:
As it currently stands, and for the foreseeable future, the Russian submarine fleet poses no significant challenge to the U.S. Navy. First, only the "Improved Akula / Akula II and the new Severodvinsk SSNs have capabilities comparable with the U.S. Los Angeles and Seawolf attack submarines. All other Russian subs possess significantly weaker capabilities. (Source: Jane's Fighting Ships, 1996-1997.)
NEW ATTACK SUBMARINE
More than 10 years ago, Janes concluded that "Improved Akula / Akula II" and Severodvinsk SSNs have capabilities comparable with the U.S. Los Angeles and Seawolf attack submarines.
