Jump to content
Please support this forum by joining the SH Patreon ×
Sturgeon's House

Unified Naval Documents Thread


Collimatrix

Recommended Posts

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 2 months later...
  • 2 months later...
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 9 months later...
  • 7 months later...
  • 6 months later...

Strategic ASW and Naval Strategy

 

http://kashti.ir/files/ENBOOKS/pdf. Strattegic antisubmarine warfare & naval strategy.pdf

 

Almost 40 years old but very interesting.  Appendixes have much good info.

 

Why was the Trident II missile given silo busting accuracy?  The author speculates that increasing the threat to Soviet land based missiles would force the USSR to use more naval assets to protest SSBNs, preventing these assets from being used to interdict NATO SLOCs.

 

Speculation about the size of the Typhoon class.  Elsewhere I have read that they carried 16 SLBMs and 4 satellite launchers, 2 commo, 2 surveillance.  They would stay underwater for a year, put the satellites up, send surveillance data and find any rebuilding activity in previously nuked countries.  They would then nuke it bouncing whatever was being rebuilt on the rubble.

 

This, and some other stuff I've read make it clear why the Seawolf class was limited to 3 vessels.  The Seawolf's major sensor innovation, a large sonar array, would have its range cut by Soviet sub quieting and would therefore not be able to search for subs very much faster.  Elsewhere I read that the Virginia was better at everything except ASW than the Seawolf.  As Virginia was improved further it caught up to Seawolf in ASW as well.  Also, the swim out torpedo tubes on the Seawolf would work for electric torpedoes but not so well for thermal torpedoes with toxic exhaust like the MK-48.  50 torpedo capacity would mostly mean more torpedoes in Davy Jones locker in a real war.  Larger sub to carry 50 torpedoes meany higher cost or lower performance for the other capabilities.

 

Exercises showed that USN subs had a 3:1 advantage over Soviet subs in getting off the first shot.  Assuming all torpedoes hit meant a 3:1 kill ratio.  If torpedoes miss, then the Soviets would be in much better shape given higher sub speeds, higher firepower, and better battle damage resistance.  All those advantages were magnified in shallow water and under ice, exactly where the US would need to go to hunt Soviet SSBNs.

 

Had the Cold War continued quiet Soviet subs would have made it too difficult for the US to hunt Soviet SSBNs and forced the US to find another way to protect SLOCs besides forcing the USSR to hold back its entire navy to protect SSBN bastions.

 

Author assumes Soviet SSBNs could be tracked but US SSBNs could not be tracked.

 

Today there is some controversy over whether Chinese SSBNs should be tracked in peacetime and threatened in war.  Apparently they can be tracked.

 

https://carnegietsinghua.org/2018/10/24/u.s.-anti-submarine-warfare-and-its-impact-pub-77495

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...