Your Nation's Warships, Batch 3

[Axis Nova]

The job of attack submarines is to hunt other subs and and to attack surface targets, not to draw attention to boomers by stacking a louder sub in the same waters as a quieter one.

A boomer's best defense is being unfindable.

[The Akasha Colony]

I'm not really sure what he wants. He asked for an anti air and land attack warship. What would the weapons and comms outfit be?

Could you not glean this information from existing and projected Russian ship classes?

I'm not trying to be rude, I'm just trying to figure out what part of this question couldn't be answered by looking at a few Wikipedia articles to start? Especially since the request is rather vague.

The job of attack submarines is to hunt other subs and and to attack surface targets, not to draw attention to boomers by stacking a louder sub in the same waters as a quieter one.

A boomer's best defense is being unfindable.

There is no particular reason why attack submarines are "louder" than missile submarines. And I'm not sure why you think this is; attack submarines have all of the same incentives to remain quiet as missile submarines. More, even, because they need to actually move at reasonable speeds while still remaining quiet in order to carry out their duties whereas a missile submarine can just crawl along at like 3 knots, a speed at which practically anything will be silent.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

The job of attack submarines is to hunt other subs and and to attack surface targets, not to draw attention to boomers by stacking a louder sub in the same waters as a quieter one.

A boomer's best defense is being unfindable.

You would be surprised at how Virginias are significantly quieter than its competition.

[Gallia-]

Surprise: There's no difference between hunting an SSN and an SSBN. It's why SSN-21 is so great.

[Axis Nova]

I'm not really sure what he wants. He asked for an anti air and land attack warship. What would the weapons and comms outfit be?

Could you not glean this information from existing and projected Russian ship classes?

I'm not trying to be rude, I'm just trying to figure out what part of this question couldn't be answered by looking at a few Wikipedia articles to start? Especially since the request is rather vague.

The job of attack submarines is to hunt other subs and and to attack surface targets, not to draw attention to boomers by stacking a louder sub in the same waters as a quieter one.

A boomer's best defense is being unfindable.

There is no particular reason why attack submarines are "louder" than missile submarines. And I'm not sure why you think this is; attack submarines have all of the same incentives to remain quiet as missile submarines. More, even, because they need to actually move at reasonable speeds while still remaining quiet in order to carry out their duties whereas a missile submarine can just crawl along at like 3 knots, a speed at which practically anything will be silent.

The more submarines in the area, the more likely one will be detected. You don't want any ASW looking in the same region as your boomers whatsoever.

Attack subs are easier to detect because of their mission profile, yes. They have to move around a lot to do their job, which inevitably creates some noise. A boomer can just sit on the bottom or creep along as needed, because it doesn't need to go fast, except in an emergency.

Also, I see you decided to ignore the other part of my post.

Escorting your subs is a bad idea, period. It's not like a surface ship where additional escorts contribute to the antiair and antimissile screen. An 'escort' sub has no real ability to defend another sub particularly well, or even coordinate with it in a hostile area, as using a gertrude will make both subs more detectable.

[Kassaran]

Why don't we just make everything an attack submarine and just give them the ability to launch a missile too?

[Gallia-]

Why don't we just make everything an attack submarine and just give them the ability to launch a missile too?

The SSBN-726 class has the same torpedo tube quantity as the SSN-688 class. The problem is that making a submarine shoot a missile requires more than just "gieb tube". Columbia is basically doing the same thing, but for SSN-774 class.

[Axis Nova]

Why don't we just make everything an attack submarine and just give them the ability to launch a missile too?

Because carrying and launching nuclear missiles and being an attack sub require different sorts of designs. Boomers have to be large to fit in all the missile tubes. This is not so good for an attack sub that wants to be as small as is practical so that it can accelerate and maneuver quickly when necessary.

[Mangahhan Super Region]

Our Primary Surface Combatant, the FREMM Frigate (But reclassified as Guided Missile Destroyers), MSR has 15 vessels. With 5 each assigned in Anti Submarine, Anti-Air/Missile and Anti Ship warfare.

SPECIFICATIONS:
Type: Frigate, Guided Missile.
Displacement: 6,700 ~ 7,000 Tons
Length: 480 ft
Beam: 21 ft
Draught: 25 ft
Draft: 18 ft
Propulsion: Combined Diesel electric and Gas Turbine
Speed: 32 knots
Range: 11,000 km
Complement: 20 Officers and 135 Crew
Sensors/Radars: Passive Electronically Scanned Array

ARMAMENT:
Gun: OTO Melara 76mm Naval Gun
Secondary Gun: Oerlikon KBA 25mm Autocannon
Anti Ship Missile: 8-12x MM-40 Exocet
Land Attack Missile: 16x MBDA SCALP Naval (Storm Shadow)
Anti Air/Missile: 16x Aster 30 or Aster 30 Block 2 BMD
Anti Submarine: 4x MBDA Milas ASW Missile or 2x MU-90 Torpedo Tubes
Aircraft: 1 or 2 ASW Helicopters

SHIPS ON SERVICE:

• MNS Chamomile FFG-01
• MNS Lillium FFG-02
• MNS Zinna FFG-03
• MNS Asteracae FFG-04
• MNS Rose FFG-05
• MNS Jasmine FFG-06
• MNS Marigold FFG-07
• MNS Peony FFG-08
• MNS Dandelion FFG-09
• MNS Sunflower FFG-10
• MNS Petunia FFG-11
• MNS Ixora FFG-12
• MNS Dahlia FFG-13
• MNS Poppy FFG-14
• MNS Chrysanthemum FFG-15

[Taihei Tengoku]

nuclear destroyer leader

right now the vague design is (fore to aft):
-twin 127/54 otobreda
-48 mark 41
-big pagoda with bridge+radars
-waist has stacks for the turbines, CIWS, torpedo tubes, and has the OK-650 underneath
-another pagoda with a SMART-L
-helicopter deck
-24 mark 41
-sonar shit

Don't know whether the reactor should be OK-650 or an American submarine reactor. Either way it is a single submarine reactor transplanted into a surface warship.

[Axis Nova]

Why nuclear power?

[Taihei Tengoku]

Why nuclear power?

mostly because I want to

ICly it is because it is part of the "raid force" operating outside of the protected bastion and therefore outside much support from the bases or the rather meager UNREP infrastructure.

[Rich and Corporations]

logistically, you are better off with nuclear megafreighters, as nuclear power does not scale downward well in size
those nuclear megafreighters could be designed to be refitted as light aircraft carriers / helicopter carriers.

won't an angled cold launch double as a torpedo tube? It is otherwise fine.

edit: have idea for nuclear powered hospital ship for natural disasters

[Taihei Tengoku]

The powerplant has already been scaled down. The cruiser is appropriating a submarine reactor lock, stock, and barrel.

[Rich and Corporations]

The powerplant has already been scaled down. The cruiser is appropriating a submarine reactor lock, stock, and barrel.

those nuclear reactors are designed on the basis that a damaged submarine is either hit at crush depth, or will soon reach it.

[Pharthan]

Something like this:

(Image)

I know it's deviantart, but this is the "Battle carrier" with a few 130mm cannons, and a handful of SSMs and SAMs, loaded with CIWS

Except this was also designed very specifically for Nationstates. You don't get to use it without going through me.
Because I drew it.

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Alistair_Greig/publication/237308846_Hybrid_nuclearfuel-cell_submarine/links/544e2cd30cf2bca5ce8ef1ad/Hybrid-nuclear-fuel-cell-submarine.pdf

How much practical utility do you guys think that a hybrid nuclear/fuel cell submarine would have?

Semi-practical.
You'd be upsizing the AIP, which means you need more sailors in Engineering, and you'd be requiring more fuel for the AIP. Alternatively, you could go for a reactor design that can operate on natural circulation instead and get just as quiet for a tiny fraction of additional space.

The USS Fitzgerald, which ran into a cargo ship a few months ago was loaded onto a transport vessel today. During loading they somehow fucked it up and created two new punctures in the hull. God bless the US Navy.

"Fucking shipyard." - Every US Navy sailor ever

Nuclear-powered missile subs need nuclear-powered attack subs to protect them, either as close escort or hunting down high-performance subs that chase them. A Ula will be hopelessly outmatched.

You are missing good anti-submarine and anti-air escorts, as well as fleet auxiliaries.

Nuclear powered missile subs need to be quiet to protect them.
Not attack subs.
All anyone except for the submarine itself knows is the general region of water that the submarine is in. Having an escort would be counterintuitive.

The powerplant has already been scaled down. The cruiser is appropriating a submarine reactor lock, stock, and barrel.

Then it's asking to be underpowered.

There is no particular reason why attack submarines are "louder" than missile submarines. And I'm not sure why you think this is; attack submarines have all of the same incentives to remain quiet as missile submarines. More, even, because they need to actually move at reasonable speeds while still remaining quiet in order to carry out their duties whereas a missile submarine can just crawl along at like 3 knots, a speed at which practically anything will be silent.

Except you're wrong.
A SSBN needs to move at no particular speed.
A fast attack does.

Fast attacks are louder by design. Not intentionally, no, but they are.

[Chinevion]

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/367476666899103776/397876571186266113/image.png

WIP LCAC

Cargo capacity
3 mbts
or 8 IFVs with accompinaning troops

How does it look, is the pusher large enough?

[Triplebaconation]

Nuclear-powered missile subs need nuclear-powered attack subs to protect them, either as close escort or hunting down high-performance subs that chase them. A Ula will be hopelessly outmatched.

You are missing good anti-submarine and anti-air escorts, as well as fleet auxiliaries.

Nuclear powered missile subs need to be quiet to protect them.
Not attack subs.
All anyone except for the submarine itself knows is the general region of water that the submarine is in. Having an escort would be counterintuitive.

In practice submarines have to go through specific regions of water to get to general regions of water.

[Kassaran]

Iirc, I read somewhere that the Soviet fleet in the North Sea and similar places actually utilized escorts for their submarines by practice, mostly in part due to the dominance of USN submarines versus contemporary Soviet submarines.

[Lamoni]

Iirc, I read somewhere that the Soviet fleet in the North Sea and similar places actually utilized escorts for their submarines by practice, mostly in part due to the dominance of USN submarines versus contemporary Soviet submarines.

That is also part of the reason for the "Boomer Bastions." They were regarded as being easier to defend against enemy attacks.

[Pharthan]

In practice submarines have to go through specific regions of water to get to general regions of water.

Yes but those specific regions are often well patrolled or remote enough that knowing when to look for the submarine there is difficult.

A boomer can just sit on the bottom

Susmarin does not like silt

[Triplebaconation]

Yes, they're often well-patrolled - by the other side!

American submarines are lucky because they have easy access to the open ocean. A Russian or Chinese SSBN transiting the GIUK gap or the Luzon Strait may well benefit from escorts.

[The Manticoran Empire]

I recently came across several articles suggesting that the Iowa class battleships should be brought back and modernized to serve as, essentially, floating missile platforms. Would this be practical?

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

I recently came across several articles suggesting that the Iowa class battleships should be brought back and modernized to serve as, essentially, floating missile platforms. Would this be practical?

Not at all.

[The Manticoran Empire]

I recently came across several articles suggesting that the Iowa class battleships should be brought back and modernized to serve as, essentially, floating missile platforms. Would this be practical?

Not at all.

The Virginia class has a mere 12 VLS tubes. An Iowa could carry upwards of 300 which could be configured for land attack or anti-ship roles.