Your Nations Warships, MKII

[Neu-Pommern]

Significantly reduced flow noise over the bow, because the gaps between the torpedo tube doors and the hull even when closed are a major source of noise. This noise impedes sonar operation, reducing the speed at which the submarine can travel before its own noise deafens its sonar. It's the reason the Russians are moving to the design. The Americans adopted it because their BQQ-2 (and replacement BQQ-5 and now LAB) sonar is absolutely massive and takes up the entire bow, but it turned out to be a better arrangement.

For boats with an extreme focus on compactness and which don't expect to be operating at high speeds (e.g. diesel-electrics), it isn't as much of an issue.

I see. I guess I'll move the torpedo tubes to the sides, then, since I expect speed and sonar will be important to Nepokolebimaya's role.

Other than that, though, it's a decent design? Mostly I was worried about the submarine-launched anti-ship ballistic missiles, though I reasoned (possibly again incorrectly?) that since Pr. 949 "Oscar" was firing P-700 at the same ranges I could handle targeting however they did.

I wonder, could you make bulges in the hull and put the tubes on the side that way?

[Gallia-]

>bow

[The Soodean Imperium]

I see. I guess I'll move the torpedo tubes to the sides, then, since I expect speed and sonar will be important to Nepokolebimaya's role.

Other than that, though, it's a decent design? Mostly I was worried about the submarine-launched anti-ship ballistic missiles, though I reasoned (possibly again incorrectly?) that since Pr. 949 "Oscar" was firing P-700 at the same ranges I could handle targeting however they did.

I wonder, could you make bulges in the hull and put the tubes on the side that way?[/img]

There actually was a converted Soviet SSBN - Pr. 667AT, known in NATO as "Yankee Notch" - which was stretched and fitted with an amidships torpedo battery to fire the RK-55 Granat cruise missile.

[Neu-Pommern]

>bow

Close enough :^)

[The Akasha Colony]

I see. I guess I'll move the torpedo tubes to the sides, then, since I expect speed and sonar will be important to Nepokolebimaya's role.

Other than that, though, it's a decent design? Mostly I was worried about the submarine-launched anti-ship ballistic missiles, though I reasoned (possibly again incorrectly?) that since Pr. 949 "Oscar" was firing P-700 at the same ranges I could handle targeting however they did.

I don't see anything wrong with it; targeting is something that would presumably be done by another platform.

I wonder, could you make bulges in the hull and put the tubes on the side that way?

(Image)

How would you load them? The USN's been considering external torpedo stowage as a way to increase firepower, but these obviously can't be reloaded. It'd be easier if you had a double hull like the Soviets/Russians, since this would allow you to store the torpedoes in the space between the hulls without adding bulges (which disrupt hydrodynamic flow).

Unsurprisingly, the general idea in submarine design is that protrusions, gaps, hatches, bulges, etc. should be minimized to the extent possible. This is balanced against other demands of course, but there should be no more than absolutely needed to allow the submarine to meet its required performance specifications.

[Neu-Pommern]

I see. I guess I'll move the torpedo tubes to the sides, then, since I expect speed and sonar will be important to Nepokolebimaya's role.

Other than that, though, it's a decent design? Mostly I was worried about the submarine-launched anti-ship ballistic missiles, though I reasoned (possibly again incorrectly?) that since Pr. 949 "Oscar" was firing P-700 at the same ranges I could handle targeting however they did.

I don't see anything wrong with it; targeting is something that would presumably be done by another platform.

I wonder, could you make bulges in the hull and put the tubes on the side that way?

(Image)

How would you load them? The USN's been considering external torpedo stowage as a way to increase firepower, but these obviously can't be reloaded. It'd be easier if you had a double hull like the Soviets/Russians, since this would allow you to store the torpedoes in the space between the hulls without adding bulges (which disrupt hydrodynamic flow).

Unsurprisingly, the general idea in submarine design is that protrusions, gaps, hatches, bulges, etc. should be minimized to the extent possible. This is balanced against other demands of course, but there should be no more than absolutely needed to allow the submarine to meet its required performance specifications.

I was thinking having the breach point inwards, but that would mean a hole in the pressure hull...So. Maybe for Norkie midget subs.

[Erusuia]

Sonal Class Long Range Patrol and Surface Warfare Corvette

I've armed it with Kh-35s, but I'm thinking of using something else

thoughts?

Bottom of the paged :*(

[Neu-Pommern]

Sonal Class Long Range Patrol and Surface Warfare Corvette

I've armed it with Kh-35s, but I'm thinking of using something else

thoughts?

Bottom of the paged :*(

Cut off the deck behind the bridge, make the funnel bigger and move it there. Do... Something with your underwater hull, even just copy it from an existing design as long as you credit it. The bow still looks really off, and you still don't have an air search radar. Surface search radar is still lol-huge.

It has come very far though, I give you that.

[New Vihenia]

>2009
>Still has bow torpedo tubes

Well one have to make tradeoff between more rational volume utilization to sonar noise.
The angled tubes, are awkward to arrange in the hull and somewhat take more precious internal volume.

[Erusuia]

Cut off the deck behind the bridge, make the funnel bigger and move it there. Do... Something with your underwater hull, even just copy it from an existing design as long as you credit it. The bow still looks really off, and you still don't have an air search radar. Surface search radar is still lol-huge.

It has come very far though, I give you that.

The air search radar is the one at the top of the mast, its what the weapons sheet says in the OSA-Ms. The surface search radar is large but for a patrol vessel I though it would make sense to have something big with longer range, although looking at it its pretty big and I'll shirk it down.

Personally the bow looks fine to me, whats off about it?

[Kouralia]

This is why I refuse, on principle, to ever open a storefront...

I have a single ship on my storefront (that is really in need of an overhaul anyway), and within a week I had made over a trillion in sales. Which of course probably covered all of the development costs of the entire naval program itself.

And the twenty Pantheon Class Carriers are doing really well floating around the Pony Lands and making sure no fucker breaks into my sovereign soil. *nods*

You'll probably want to assign one attack submarine to each Battlegroup; their sensitive passive sonar and low noise levels make them valuable for detecting and tracking other submarines. Grouping them all together into one "wolf pack" was common in WWI/WWII but isn't as efficient today.

They'll be operating independently even if directly assigned to the carrier group, so assigning them to what is probably just an administrative squadron isn't much different.

what he said

That's also largely why I've never bothered adding anything else to my storefront, even though theoretically almost everything I make is available for export.

And this makes me sad.

Why would this be an issue? Does 'CVN-65' and 'CVN-68' tell you that the ships are different classes? Or 'D32' vs. 'D89'? Or how the Los Angeles-class goes from SSN-773 to the Virginia-class SSN-774 while the Seawolfs somehow get SSN-21 through SSN-23? Most pennant or hull numbers make no class distinction.

What he said.

[The Akasha Colony]

That's also largely why I've never bothered adding anything else to my storefront, even though theoretically almost everything I make is available for export.

And this makes me sad.

I may put the submarines up when I finish the diesel-electric one, since that would be a reasonably complete product line. The rest of the stuff I've put on IIWiki is mostly finished but too spread out, I probably should have just made a single storefront for everything rather than making branch ones. Right now I'm working on an LCAC though, of all things, so once again for now it's backburner stuff. Thanks, Aldnoah.Zero.

[Kassaran]

My nation has small striping patterns along the main bridge superstructure that identify them visually. While not easily distinguishable, these patterns are on a rotating cipher that is changed simply by slipping each stripe out for a new one which will again re-identify it. While this doesn't necessarily pertain to actual inter-fleet identification, it does allow for us to make it appear certain patrols are more or less intense based on the frequency of identifier stripe changes.

[New Vihenia]

So recently someone brought up again about Li-Ion battery for submarine application...Anyway compared to the conventional Lead Acid battery, Li-Ion appears to have higher energy capacity and being lighter than Lead Acid.

But so far i haven't really found hard numbers on this, like comparison between 100H discharge rating of Lead Acid Vs Li-Ion and other battery technology such as Sodium-Sulphide battery used onboard German U-212.

I wonder if anyone can provide me insight on this.

Lead acid battery anyway is able to store 23 watt/pound of power in 100 H discharge rating.

Using that information, one can actually make estimate on underwater endurance and potential speed of Diesel electric submarine.

[Dewhurst-Narculis]

So recently someone brought up again about Li-Ion battery for submarine application...Anyway compared to the conventional Lead Acid battery, Li-Ion appears to have higher energy capacity and being lighter than Lead Acid.

But so far i haven't really found hard numbers on this, like comparison between 100H discharge rating of Lead Acid Vs Li-Ion and other battery technology such as Sodium-Sulphide battery used onboard German U-212.

I wonder if anyone can provide me insight on this.

Lead acid battery anyway is able to store 23 watt/pound of power in 100 H discharge rating.

Using that information, one can actually make estimate on underwater endurance and potential speed of Diesel electric submarine.

Not really, it can give you a really rough figure, hydrodynamics and motor efficiency are needed before we start narrowing it down

[New Vihenia]

Not really, it can give you a really rough figure, hydrodynamics and motor efficiency are needed before we start narrowing it down

I'm already did a calculator that take account hydrodynamics of submarine about a year ago. But so far i found nothing on submarine battery.

Usual motor efficiency assumption for DE sub however will be around 75-80%. Power to propel the submarine however can easily be estimated. I think i'm already posted the method here somewhere.

[Dewhurst-Narculis]

Not really, it can give you a really rough figure, hydrodynamics and motor efficiency are needed before we start narrowing it down

I'm already did a calculator that take account hydrodynamics of submarine about a year ago. But so far i found nothing on submarine battery.

Usual motor efficiency assumption for DE sub however will be around 75-80%. Power to propel the submarine however can easily be estimated. I think i'm already posted the method here somewhere.

I'd love to see those calculations and formulae for sheer curiosity's sake

[New Vihenia]

I'd love to see those calculations and formulae for sheer curiosity's sake

Sure. Here's an excel

http://www.mediafire.com/view/dmttt6b49 ... ttery.xlsx

This is based on Tom Stefanick's "Strategic Anti Submarine Warfare and Naval Strategy" and Ulrich Gabler's "Submarine Design"

Looks simple though, but it's representative.

[Dewhurst-Narculis]

I'd love to see those calculations and formulae for sheer curiosity's sake

Sure. Here's an excel

http://www.mediafire.com/view/dmttt6b49 ... ttery.xlsx

This is based on Tom Stefanick's "Strategic Anti Submarine Warfare and Naval Strategy" and Ulrich Gabler's "Submarine Design"

Looks simple though, but it's representative.

Ah awesome, looks like a basic sub version of Springsharp

[Freihafen]

Strictly speaking...

(Image)

Edit: Why the hype about IR guidance? Countermeasures against infrared seeking exist just as they do for radar guidance.

The hype isn't about IR alone, it's about dual-mode guidance, which is much harder to spoof as it requires distracting both the IR and radar guidance. Radar jamming has also gotten rather impressive as of late, whereas countermeasures effective against imaging infrared, and especially multi-color optics, are rare. Of course, so are such complicated seekers.

True, this is AFAIK the sensor fit of the LRASM which seems to have the ability to 'see' enemy ships in detail through imaging infrared and avoid CIWSes to some extent.

LADAR is emerging as a guidance option for AShMs on the Perseus, but I'm personally sceptical of LADAR's effectiveness considering the increasing non-reflectiveness of warships as part of signature reduction measures. What does everyone think?

[The Soodean Imperium]

The air search radar is the one at the top of the mast, its what the weapons sheet says in the OSA-Ms.

Right and wrong. The one on top of the mast is a target-designation radar for the Osa-M, but it doesn't do air search. As a fun side note, that radar is actually a modification of the target-designation radar used by the land-based, self-propelled Osa SAM (see front), which had a separate search radar of its own (see top). For a warship, of course, you'll want something much more powerful than that.

I would recommend using a radar in the "Fregat" series, preferably the modified "Top Plate" with the rear array replaced by a wind vane for weight reduction. Sadly this isn't on either of Gollevainen's new parts sheets, but it does appear on the mast of his Pr. 1124ME "Grisha V" and can be found on Shipbucket's old Radars parts sheet.

Personally the bow looks fine to me, whats off about it?

See the Pr. 1124 again for an example. The "curve" seems to start too far back, roughly where it would on a semi-hydroplaning patrol boat, while the lack of a sonar (and, indeed, of any anti-submarine armament - see my earlier post on this) will make your patrol task much more difficult.

[The Akasha Colony]

Still very much a WIP but I suppose I'll post it now for whatever feedback:



Things still to be done:

• The remainder of the weapons (CIWS + MGs)
• Possibly a second set of air intakes for the skirt
• The entire electronics outfit
• More detail work all around

It's actually my first time bothering with handrails, I haven't bothered with them in the past, although I haven't done warships in a while. As can be presumed from the name, it is heavily inspired by the Aldnoah.Zero LCAC design, although with changes to make it a bit more practical. As the scale implies, it's much more in the vein of the Russian Zubr than the American LCAC or STSC, able to land a company of infantry and light vehicles or most of a platoon of tanks, depending on configuration. I've also considered a converted SES type (rather than pure hovercraft) for use as a counter-mine vessel, like the Alta-class, and possibly a more heavily-armed gun/missile boat with possible use in shore support.

[Neu-Pommern]

https://i.imgur.com/oLwBO5t.png

IT BEGINS

[Dewhurst-Narculis]

https://i.imgur.com/oLwBO5t.png

IT BEGINS

Might want to raise the hangar roof about 1-2 feet as they usually have a ceiling mounted crane and a other things like bracing and lighting



Also are you planning on these vessels to have a lifespan exceeding the fuel in the reactor? Just make sure the reactor is accessible from above to enable removal for repairs and refueling.

[Neu-Pommern]

Actually, given the size of the reactor, if I raise the hangar roof a bit I might be able to pull the whole thing out through the hangar itself.


edit: bottom of page'd

https://i.imgur.com/oLwBO5t.png

IT BEGINS