Your Nation's Warships, Batch 3

[North Arkana]

Just how overrated are Russia's "black hole" subs anyway?

The Severodvinsk-class is a very dangerous submarine, but it's not as quiet as the Seawolf or Virginia. It's closer to the improved Los Angeles-class in terms of noise radiated, and has a very nasty anti-ship missile armament. Russian sonar technology has also gotten considerably better, with its towed array sonar being comparable to the AN/TB-16 at best. Her passive sonar is probably a fair bit worse then that judging by the current state of Russia's microelectronics industry.

I personally think they're very good boats, especially in light of what happened to Soviet submarine building after the end of the Cold War, but they're about 30 years out of date by NATO standards.

Figured as much. I guess I can now partly lay to rest the whole, "ermahgawd, murican carriers obsolete Rooshen blackhuls sink tehm ul en wur" nonsense I hear as mostly being hopelessly optimistic wishfulness by Putin fanboys, barring some horrid failures of ASW systems and incompetent handling of NATO hunter-killer subs.

[The Akasha Colony]

Just how overrated are Russia's "black hole" subs anyway?

Depends who's making the claims. The Russians have made major strides in quieting, but still haven't quite caught up to the US in total quieting performance or sonar performance. Allegedly, the USSR was very interested in and invested very heavily in non-acoustic stealth and detection and there are claims they surpassed the US in this field (which the US Navy at least publicly has not put as much stock in). They were making steady progress in quieting until the collapse of the USSR and had closed a lot of the gap, but then sort of got stuck like a lot of the rest of the former Soviet defense industry when the USSR broke up and the budget basically evaporated.

The US stopped spending as much as it did during the Reagan years as well, but didn't basically freeze like a lot of Russian projects did. The Russians were rather close with Akula against Los Angeles, but this is partly because Los Angeles itself is a relatively conservative and mediocre design. The US leapt ahead again with Seawolf, but suddenly found no new opponents with the end of the Cold War, so Virginia is designed to maintain similar levels of stealth but without the cost.

So on the one hand, they're not the absolute shit that some people in this thread have called them. But they aren't the unchallenged apex predators of the sea either. But all modern submarines are reaching the point where passive detection of any sort is becoming untenable as a reliable method of detection. They're just too quiet to pick out of the ocean noise unless you already know exactly what pattern to isolate, and even then it's not easy. That's why there's so much interest these days in low-frequency active arrays like SURTASS and Sonar 2087, and more radical alternatives like lasers.

[Gallia-]

Figured as much. I guess I can now partly lay to rest the whole, "ermahgawd, murican carriers obsolete Rooshen blackhuls sink tehm ul en wur" nonsense I hear as mostly being hopelessly optimistic wishfulness by Putin fanboys, barring some horrid failures of ASW systems and incompetent handling of NATO hunter-killer subs.

That exists. It has nothing to do with Russian submarines, though.

The "horrid failures" of ASW are functionally innate given the lack of fixed-wing, long loiter time ASW aircraft, like S-3, organic to the battlegroup, and the reliance on HF active sonar on USN battlegroup escorts.

A modern carrier battlegroup (not even anymore) can detect a submarine only at very close range and respond within a similarly constrained space. To protect itself, it has to carry around Victorious, Effective, or Impeccable to protect itself in the old style of proactive defense. It's not so much that a carrier group will get stalked by an SSN (this is possible, though unlikely) or something, but that it won't be able to find submarines at all and might blunder into them accidentally rather than deliberately avoid them, or otherwise be taken by surprise by an attack submarine that went unnoticed. Something using modern torpedoes with ranges in the tens of kilometers means very little time to react.

LFA is necessary to give carrier battlegroups the style of information freedom they enjoyed in the 1960s, again. The other part is being able to talk to MPAs like Poseidon without throwing a fit. Not sure the latter can be accomplished without an escort fighter with long legs like A/FX though.

[Triplebaconation]

It's hard to imagine a ship under construction since the glory days of Family Matters being anything but a dog.

[Gallia-]

left sitting in the frigid russian winters so long the rust has begun to rust ;-;

[United States of PA]

[ Victorious, Effective, or Impeccable

Out of curiosity what are you referring to by this? First thought was RN carriers but i only found Victorious as a actual Royal Navy carrier, and i don't recall any Commonwealth carriers named Effective or Impeccable off the top of my head.

[The Akasha Colony]

[ Victorious, Effective, or Impeccable

Out of curiosity what are you referring to by this? First thought was RN carriers but i only found Victorious as a actual Royal Navy carrier, and i don't recall any Commonwealth carriers named Effective or Impeccable off the top of my head.

He means these:

Victorious-class ocean surveillance ship
USNS Impeccable

They carry the large SURTASS LFA systems necessary to detect submarines beyond the very short, basically self-defense ranges that current USN towed arrays on destroyers and cruisers can manage.

[The Technocratic Syndicalists]

Every serious NS power should have SURTASS or Sonar 2087 on all its surface combatants and a squadron of S-3 (or some equivalent) carrier based ASW patrol aircraft.

[Gallia-]

good luck fitting SURTASS LFA on any "combatant" lol

s-3 is also ancient

im not sure if the us navy ever considered an actual replacement for the thing

[Purpelia]

By the way, the official names for the first two of my new river monitors are going to be Dagon and Hydra. The IC story is that War magazine, my military magazine held a contest and those names won.

[Crookfur]

By the way, the official names for the first two of my new river monitors are going to be Dagon and Hydra. The IC story is that War magazine, my military magazine held a contest and those names won.

Boaty McBoatface still wins, the Barak O'bomber comes a close second and Spazzy McGhee taking third.

Purp's war fappers and boat spotters confirmed as having no sense of fun.

[The Technocratic Syndicalists]

good luck fitting SURTASS LFA on any "combatant" lol

s-3 is also ancient

im not sure if the us navy ever considered an actual replacement for the thing

Sort of

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Support_Aircraft

[Laritaia]

What they need to do is work out a way of palletizing the Merlin HM.2s ASW systems so they can load it onto one of their MCV-22s

[The Technocratic Syndicalists]

What they need to do is work out a way of palletizing the Merlin HM.2s ASW systems so they can load it onto one of their MCV-22s

SV-22 was a thing, IIRC it wouild have carried APS-137 surface search radar, 60 sonobuoys, dipping sonar, a MAD, and hardpoints for harpoons or ASW torpedoes. Basically a mix of the S-3 and MH-60R.

Fixed wing ASW would still have greater range and payload though. Having both SV-22 and some S-3 replacement would be ideal, SV-22s could be carried by your escorts while the carrier has a squadron of fixed wing ASW craft.

[Gallia-]

good luck fitting SURTASS LFA on any "combatant" lol

s-3 is also ancient

im not sure if the us navy ever considered an actual replacement for the thing

Sort of

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Support_Aircraft

CSA was an E-2 replacement

by the time he appears the USN has given up the idea of fixed-wing ASW anyway

the closest is apparently Advanced Tactical Support Aircraft but he died before NATF did and the other things following like Boeing EX and CSA were just E-2Cs with turbofans

[Laritaia]

What they need to do is work out a way of palletizing the Merlin HM.2s ASW systems so they can load it onto one of their MCV-22s

SV-22 was a thing, IIRC it wouild have carried APS-137 surface search radar, 60 sonobuoys, dipping sonar, a MAD, and hardpoints for harpoons or ASW torpedoes. Basically a mix of the S-3 and MH-60R.

Fixed wing ASW would still have greater range and payload though. Having both SV-22 and some S-3 replacement would be ideal, SV-22s could be carried by your escorts while the carrier has a squadron of fixed wing ASW craft.

I don't mean the SV-22, that would have been a dedicated platform i mean literally take the regular COD/VERTREP MCV-22 and roll a palletized Merlin ASW system on board this would be a quick and relatively cheap way of resolving the fact that the USN has no medium ASW assets since the retirement of the Seaking and the Viking

Also there is no way you would be able to operate a V-22 off of a Burke, being able to fit it on the landing pad doesn't mean it can base off of the ship for any appreciable time.

[The Technocratic Syndicalists]

I don't mean the SV-22, that would have been a dedicated platform i mean literally take the regular COD/VERTREP MCV-22 and roll a palletized Merlin ASW system on board this would be a quick and relatively cheap way of resolving the fact that the USN has no medium ASW assets since the retirement of the Seaking and the Viking

Also there is no way you would be able to operate a V-22 off of a Burke, being able to fit it on the landing pad doesn't mean it can base off of the ship for any appreciable time.

Something like a Zumwalt might be able to handle a V-22, depends on how hardened the deck is.

CMV-22B is probably what you'd want to base an ASW package off of as it has extra fuel tanks to meet the requirements of the COD mission. A pallet with a dipping sonar and a modified rear ramp with built in sonobuoy launcher would be something to look at. The USN seems to have given up ASW as a major priority so who knows.

[The Soodean Imperium]

SV-22 was a thing, IIRC it wouild have carried APS-137 surface search radar, 60 sonobuoys, dipping sonar, a MAD, and hardpoints for harpoons or ASW torpedoes. Basically a mix of the S-3 and MH-60R.

Fixed wing ASW would still have greater range and payload though. Having both SV-22 and some S-3 replacement would be ideal, SV-22s could be carried by your escorts while the carrier has a squadron of fixed wing ASW craft.

I don't mean the SV-22, that would have been a dedicated platform i mean literally take the regular COD/VERTREP MCV-22 and roll a palletized Merlin ASW system on board this would be a quick and relatively cheap way of resolving the fact that the USN has no medium ASW assets since the retirement of the Seaking and the Viking

Also there is no way you would be able to operate a V-22 off of a Burke, being able to fit it on the landing pad doesn't mean it can base off of the ship for any appreciable time.

Relevant question regarding my recent frigate thing:

Would there be any problem with having ASW tiltrotors based from a larger cruiser or light carrier use destroyers' and frigates' landing pads to re-arm, refuel, conduct basic repairs, and possibly switch out crews, as a means of extending their patrol range and spreading out their area coverage? How long could a given aircraft be based this way before having to return to its "mothership" for more thorough maintenance?

[Laritaia]

I don't mean the SV-22, that would have been a dedicated platform i mean literally take the regular COD/VERTREP MCV-22 and roll a palletized Merlin ASW system on board this would be a quick and relatively cheap way of resolving the fact that the USN has no medium ASW assets since the retirement of the Seaking and the Viking

Also there is no way you would be able to operate a V-22 off of a Burke, being able to fit it on the landing pad doesn't mean it can base off of the ship for any appreciable time.

Something like a Zumwalt might be able to handle a V-22, depends on how hardened the deck is.

CMV-22B is probably what you'd want to base an ASW package off of as it has extra fuel tanks to meet the requirements of the COD mission. A pallet with a dipping sonar and a modified rear ramp with built in sonobuoy launcher would be something to look at. The USN seems to have given up ASW as a major priority so who knows.

Yeah i meant the CMV-22

As to the Zumwalt, it's more about if you can conduct maintenance on the aircraft undercover, the Zumwalt's hangar like the Burke's is sized for an SH-60s not the somewhat tubby Osprey.

[The Technocratic Syndicalists]

Would there be any problem with having ASW tiltrotors based from a larger cruiser or light carrier use destroyers' and frigates' landing pads to re-arm, refuel, conduct basic repairs, and possibly switch out crews, as a means of extending their patrol range and spreading out their area coverage? How long could a given aircraft be based this way before having to return to its "mothership" for more thorough maintenance?

It depends on the size of the flight deck and hangar. The LCS is theoretically capable of handling the CH-53K (which is a lot bigger than a V-22) so I guess it could conceivably handle a V-22. The thing with the V-22 is when the engines on the V-22 tilt upwards to take off vertically the deck is blasted with hot exhaust which overtime can cause problems for the deck. IIRC the wasp and america class amphibious assault ships have special heat resistant coatings on their decks specifically to deal with this (and for the F-35B). If you just have one V-22 operating off the deck IDK if this will be a problem. One of the advantages of the new V-280 is that the engines don't rotate with the propellers, they're fixed horizontally and thus wont blast a runway or flight deck with hot exhaust. Food for thought,

[United States of PA]

He means these:

Victorious-class ocean surveillance ship
USNS Impeccable

They carry the large SURTASS LFA systems necessary to detect submarines beyond the very short, basically self-defense ranges that current USN towed arrays on destroyers and cruisers can manage.

Thanks, appreciate it.

EDIT: I take it by Gallas comment SURTASS is freaking huge compared to frigate/destroyer tails?

[Purpelia]

By the way, the official names for the first two of my new river monitors are going to be Dagon and Hydra. The IC story is that War magazine, my military magazine held a contest and those names won.

Boaty McBoatface still wins, the Barak O'bomber comes a close second and Spazzy McGhee taking third.

Purp's war fappers and boat spotters confirmed as having no sense of fun.

Purpelian humor in general frowns upon silly and whimsical.

[Gallia-]

>purpelia
>humour

the worst part is humourless spergs are so often wrong too

[The Akasha Colony]

Thanks, appreciate it.

EDIT: I take it by Gallas comment SURTASS is freaking huge compared to frigate/destroyer tails?

Yes. Each source projector is roughly the size of a bathtub, and there are 18 of them deployed vertically below the ship. And then there's the 1.5 km listening array, with an additional length of cable needed to spool it out. This does not include the space for processing and power systems to enable the system to put out the 230+ dB it is capable of, or the handling systems to deploy and recover the array.

[Gallia-]

it can probably fit fine physically if you move some stuff

the problem is that SURTASS isnt something a combatant has

it's operated by civilian contractors and used aboard US Naval Auxiliary ships, which arent combatants, and have their own support structure in the form of the IUSS

not giving it a dedicated hull is wasting its potential really