Your Nation's Warships, Batch 3

[Rhodesialund]

I'll check it out, but that still doesn't mitigate the very close ties Wikileaks has with the Russians. They gave Assange a slot on Russia Today, which was founded and still is a propaganda arm of the Russian government. That isn't a minor association, and that kind of working relationship makes me severely doubt their claims of impartiality.

Can we please take the Wikileaks talk elsewhere? Perhaps to NSG? It has nothing at all to do with boats.

NSG is cancer.

[Rhodesialund]

Okay, question for everyone.


What's your favorite type of Missile Boats?

[The Akasha Colony]

There isn't one.

All of them provide a different balance between size, cost, power requirements, and capability. Whatever unit is "best" depends on your needs and your budgeting. That's one of the reasons why so many different types exist in the firs place.

For my corvette, a bit on budget since i want my corvette to be on slightly cheaper side.

Just buy Sea GIRAFFE then.

[The Technocratic Syndicalists]

Sole carrier. Can't built another one. Not until 2021

That's not a good excuse. It's hard to overstate how much of a piece of junk the Kuznetsov is. It's a barely sea worthy rust bucket that needs a tug to escort it at all times because it's breakdowns are so frequent. In any serious shooting war it would be nothing but a liability to your forces. The only way to make it worth anything would be to literally gut the ship from the inside out and replace every single power generation, propulsion, and HVAC system, and at that point it would be probably less of a hassle just build a new carrier from scratch. The only value you'd get from a Kuznetsov is if you tow it out to sea and use it as a target for torpedoes and/or anti-ship missiles. It's essentially a perfect example of everything not to do when you design and build an aircraft carrier.

[North Arkana]

Sole carrier. Can't built another one. Not until 2021

That's not a good excuse. It's hard to overstate how much of a piece of junk the Kuznetsov is. It's a barely sea worthy rust bucket that needs a tug to escort it at all times because it's breakdowns are so frequent. In any serious shooting war it would be nothing but a liability to your forces. The only way to make it worth anything would be to literally gut the ship from the inside out and replace every single power generation, propulsion, and HVAC system, and at that point it would be probably less of a hassle just build a new carrier from scratch. The only value you'd get from a Kuznetsov is if you tow it out to sea and use it as a target for torpedoes and/or anti-ship missiles. It's essentially a perfect example of everything not to do when you design and build an aircraft carrier.

That time when the USN rescued your carrier and gets to point and laugh when ever your navy tries to look tough.

[Urran]

Okay, question for everyone.


What's your favorite type of Missile Boats?

Skjold Class.


But right now I'm trying to decide if I want to deploy MK48 or Blackshark torpedoes from my subs....

[The Kievan People]

Okay, question for everyone.


What's your favorite type of Missile Boats?

[Gallia-]

ships are

hms capital expropriator
hms parasite destroyer
hms financier smasher
hms proletariat dictatorship
hms wealth redistributor
hms publicly owned industry
hms internationale
hms narval

[The Akasha Colony]

Okay, question for everyone.


What's your favorite type of Missile Boats?

Skjold Class.


But right now I'm trying to decide if I want to deploy MK48 or Blackshark torpedoes from my subs....

What sorts of targets are you engaging?

There was a discussion a few months ago about fueled vs. electric torpedoes.

Generally, there seems to be a noticeable trend for navies that operate and intend to engage fast-moving, deep-diving nuclear submarines and fast surface targets to prefer fueled torpedoes of some sort, be they Mark 48 (US), Spearfish (UK), or Type 53 (Russia). These torpedoes are noisier because they have internal combustion engines but have greater power density than an electric torpedo (even one with Al-AgO batteries) and can thus sustain higher speeds for longer distances and at high speed the engine noise is largely irrelevant anyway (flow and cavitation noise will be noisier anyway).

Electric torpedoes are best for variable speed use because they can be throttled up and down without a loss in efficiency as would be experienced in a swashplate or turbine engine. They're also quieter since they have no internal engine, which further lends them good characteristics for long range, low speed operation against slower targets. In theory they also perform better at extreme depths because they do not lose power to exhaust backpressure, but they have to overcome their deficit in power density first for this to matter and at least in theory monopropellant torpedoes can sustain similar outputs at that depth (while developing superior output at shallower depths with less backpressure).

[Urran]

I'll be engaging anything from other subs at depth to carriers and LHDs to frigates and destroyers. So basically the full spectrum of naval targets.

I like the MK48 because of its speed, and the fact that it can be but doesn't have to be wire guided, but the Blackshark because of its range. Supposedly the USN is working on a propellant to increase the range of its torpedoes dramatically.

I've also heard that the Blackshark has a speed of up to 50 knots (according to naval technology's website), while the MK48 Mod7 only has a speed of 28 knots. Wikipedia sites about the same but makes it seem like the electronics on the MK48 are more advanced.

[The Technocratic Syndicalists]

I'll be engaging anything from other subs at depth to carriers and LHDs to frigates and destroyers. So basically the full spectrum of naval targets.

I like the MK48 because of its speed, and the fact that it can be but doesn't have to be wire guided, but the Blackshark because of its range. Supposedly the USN is working on a propellant to increase the range of its torpedoes dramatically.

monoprollant is best for performance as it has a higher specific energy and energy density. You can use IEP in place of a gearbox (with a resultant weight penalty) if you want to get some of the low-speed advantages of an electric torpedo.

Your best bets to replace otto fuel II would be using solid-oxide fuel cells, something like HYDROX which uses uses oxygen and hydrogen gas produced by liquid lithium perchlorate and the reaction of water and lithium, respectively, to fuel a closed-cycle rankine engine, or using oxygen generated from a lithium perchlorate fuel cell and reacting it with a hydrocarbon fuel (say JP-5) to drive a turbine.

[The Kievan People]

I'll be engaging anything from other subs at depth to carriers and LHDs to frigates and destroyers. So basically the full spectrum of naval targets.

I like the MK48 because of its speed, and the fact that it can be but doesn't have to be wire guided, but the Blackshark because of its range. Supposedly the USN is working on a propellant to increase the range of its torpedoes dramatically.

I've also heard that the Blackshark has a speed of up to 50 knots (according to naval technology's website), while the MK48 Mod7 only has a speed of 28 knots. Wikipedia sites about the same but makes it seem like the electronics on the MK48 are more advanced.

The Mk 48 range and speed on wikipedia is just the numbers from the US Navy website.

It's not even remotely correct.

[The Akasha Colony]

I'll be engaging anything from other subs at depth to carriers and LHDs to frigates and destroyers. So basically the full spectrum of naval targets.

I like the MK48 because of its speed, and the fact that it can be but doesn't have to be wire guided, but the Blackshark because of its range. Supposedly the USN is working on a propellant to increase the range of its torpedoes dramatically.

Every modern torpedo uses a more or less identical method of guidance, with onboard sonar and optional wires. Mk 48 is nothing special in this regard.

Extreme range looks nice but is of limited utility because of guidance limitations. The onboard sonar on a torpedo has relatively limited range and thus the torpedo must be guided via wire from the submarine (which can use its own more powerful sonar to provide guidance) until it is close enough for the onboard sonar to take over in the terminal phase. This of course is exactly the same way that longer range air-to-air missiles like AMRAAM and Meteor operate. The problem is that while missiles can use radio communication to maintain a data link over hundreds of kilometers, a torpedo is limited to wire guidance for updates, which means it is limited by the feasible length of wire that can be carried and the strength of that wire to resist snapping and tangling at longer lengths. Which is only a few dozen kilometers worth, generally.

There aren't yet any reliable solutions to this problem and that's the real reason why torpedo ranges have stayed largely the same for decades with only modest increases over time. There have been plenty of experiments that demonstrate significantly increased range is not a particularly difficult accomplishment from a kinematic perspective. It's just that doing so is pointless if the torpedo cannot actually be guided to that range. And at such ranges it is an open question as to whether the submarine itself will be able to detect and classify targets reliably at that range, depending on type (loud surface ships would be detectable, but others perhaps less so). The USN has indeed been looking at extreme-range torpedoes but so far has been mum on the guidance question.

Atlas Elektronik of Germany has proposed an extendable GPS antenna for its ultra-long range Seahake torpedo variants, allowing the torpedo to track its own position and home in toward pre-programmed coordinates, but this is only a partial solution because any reasonably maneuverable target may be long gone by the time the torpedo reaches those coordinates. A torpedo with a range of 100 kilometers traveling at a speed of 27 knots will take two hours to reach its maximum range. Even a slow tanker can move 20+ kilometers in that time.

At such ranges, it becomes easier to simply use a long-range submarine-launched missile like Harpoon, which can cover that distance in minutes instead of hours. It may be less stealthy and less likely to destroy the target in a single strike but it avoids all of the above problems.

[Urran]

I'm guessing that they actually have similar top speeds and ranges? 30 miles is cited as the Blacksharks maximum range. That's the farthest I'd want a torpedo to go before I decide it'll be a better optional to fire a missile instead.

At the same time I don't want to have to get within 10 miles of a surface ship to fire a torpedo, especially if it's Asroc equipped. I'm confident in my submarines stealth capabilities, I just do not want to have to get any closer than absolutely necessary.

[The Kievan People]

50-60km seems to be about the maximum practical length of a guidance wire.

[Urran]

I'm likely going to go with the MK48 . It seems like the better choice for my purposes.

[The Akasha Colony]

I'm guessing that they actually have similar top speeds and ranges? 30 miles is cited as the Blacksharks maximum range. That's the farthest I'd want a torpedo to go before I decide it'll be a better optional to fire a missile instead.

At the same time I don't want to have to get within 10 miles of a surface ship to fire a torpedo, especially if it's Asroc equipped. I'm confident in my submarines stealth capabilities, I just do not want to have to get any closer than absolutely necessary.

Black Shark likely has a longer range at lower speeds than Mk 48, since it's electric and is more efficient at lower speeds (where hydrodynamic drag is lower). It's also noticeably longer than Mk 48. Mk 48 may well have better range at higher speeds due to better power density. Spearfish is faster than both, though.

[Urran]

I'm guessing that they actually have similar top speeds and ranges? 30 miles is cited as the Blacksharks maximum range. That's the farthest I'd want a torpedo to go before I decide it'll be a better optional to fire a missile instead.

At the same time I don't want to have to get within 10 miles of a surface ship to fire a torpedo, especially if it's Asroc equipped. I'm confident in my submarines stealth capabilities, I just do not want to have to get any closer than absolutely necessary.

Black Shark likely has a longer range at lower speeds than Mk 48, since it's electric and is more efficient at lower speeds (where hydrodynamic drag is lower). It's also noticeably longer than Mk 48. Mk 48 may well have better range at higher speeds due to better power density. Spearfish is faster than both, though.

What's the length and range on the spearfish?

[The Akasha Colony]

Black Shark likely has a longer range at lower speeds than Mk 48, since it's electric and is more efficient at lower speeds (where hydrodynamic drag is lower). It's also noticeably longer than Mk 48. Mk 48 may well have better range at higher speeds due to better power density. Spearfish is faster than both, though.

What's the length and range on the spearfish?

Most length statements seem to be ~6 meters.

Range for torpedoes is always a tricky question. The early models of Spearfish could do a little over 20 km at 60 knots by at least one estimate, but the newer ones can reach 80+ knots although their range at that speed is unknown. Early models had reliability issues but these were claimed to have been solved by 1994. This appears to be at least partly related to insufficient testing and quality control measures prior to delivery rather than entirely the result of design defects. The current upgrade program though may result in a reduction in speed as the dual-fuel system is replaced with a cheaper, easier to maintain monopropellant system (removing the HAP supply and using just Otto fuel II).

[Velkanika]

Okay, question for everyone.


What's your favorite type of Missile Boats?

Oddly enough, the 1241.8 Molniya-derived Indian Veer-class.

[Rhodesialund]

(Image)

ships are

hms capital expropriator
hms parasite destroyer
hms financier smasher
hms proletariat dictatorship
hms wealth redistributor
hms publicly owned industry
hms internationale
hms narval

Gallia, where do you keep finding such great pictures? D:

[Gallia-]

(Image)

ships are

hms capital expropriator
hms parasite destroyer
hms financier smasher
hms proletariat dictatorship
hms wealth redistributor
hms publicly owned industry
hms internationale
hms narval

Gallia, where do you keep finding such great pictures? D:

google

[The Technocratic Syndicalists]

(Image)

ships are

hms capital creator
hms communist crusher
hms socialist smasher
hms representative democracy
hms tax slasher
hms privately owned industry
hms rand
hms hayek

fixed those for you

[Gallia-]

ron paul couldnt build Mission Essential Unit even if everything he touched turned to specie

galla is a representative democracy try again

it is also locked in eternal combat with the forces of radical marxism double try again

it's not a comment on lenin it's a comment on radical individualism usurping the collective

galla is a human hive so it is opposed to all forms of radical individualism, which includes J.S. Mill, Marx, and Ron Paul equally

the closest country to galla irl might be the fascist empires that were destroyed by democracy but galla is also a democracy so that doesnt work really

gallans are probably just fundamentally different from humanity psychologically so of course you cant shove their beliefs into the same box you insensitive boor

[New Chilokver]

Sole carrier. Can't built another one. Not until 2021

That's not a good excuse. It's hard to overstate how much of a piece of junk the Kuznetsov is. It's a barely sea worthy rust bucket that needs a tug to escort it at all times because it's breakdowns are so frequent. In any serious shooting war it would be nothing but a liability to your forces. The only way to make it worth anything would be to literally gut the ship from the inside out and replace every single power generation, propulsion, and HVAC system, and at that point it would be probably less of a hassle just build a new carrier from scratch. The only value you'd get from a Kuznetsov is if you tow it out to sea and use it as a target for torpedoes and/or anti-ship missiles. It's essentially a perfect example of everything not to do when you design and build an aircraft carrier.

What's so inherently wrong with the Kuznetsov's design?