Re: How About Eight Bow Tubes and Sixteen Vertical Launch Tubes?

feeds@yuku.com (westwords2020) — Wed, 21 May 2008 03:06:39 GMT

Ran across some info in Combat Fleets about Class 212A German subs using sodium sulfer batteries and have been doing some checking on this on the web and data I come across shows a one ton lead acid battery having an energy density of 20kw/hrs while a one ton sodium sulfur battery weighing the same one tone having 117 kw/hrs or about 5.8 times capacity. Size is more compact than equal weight battery.

A battery for fixed use puts out 4558kw/hrs for a 3.4 ton unit, lasts for 15 years,...

Re: How About Eight Bow Tubes and Sixteen Vertical Launch Tubes?

feeds@yuku.com (westwords2020) — Tue, 13 May 2008 00:37:07 GMT

I have been thinking on how to proceed. The submarine would need a substantial range on schnorkel or surfaced to be able to threaten Tiawan or other areas such as dealing with Australia whose Collins class are the current size champs at 3000 tons submerged. I am researching still and using Combat Fleets for info which so far suggests a schnorkel speed of 10 knots and a radius of several thousand miles to cover that area of the Pacific.

I need to consult some maps. I did come across...

Re: How About Eight Bow Tubes and Sixteen Vertical Launch Tubes?

feeds@yuku.com (westwords2020) — Sat, 10 May 2008 23:16:00 GMT

Thankyou for the headsup on Wikipedia. I had some suspicions but didn't know it was that bad. Still, it seems to have some useful info but maybeye that entire line about a mast mounted gun from a submerged sub is just baloney.

Re: How About Eight Bow Tubes and Sixteen Vertical Launch Tubes?

feeds@yuku.com (Viper) — Sat, 10 May 2008 22:19:30 GMT

Wikipedia is French for Gypsy Fortune Teller and about as reliable. I prefer reading teal leaves over Wikipedia for all my military information.

Re: How About Eight Bow Tubes and Sixteen Vertical Launch Tubes?

feeds@yuku.com (westwords2020) — Fri, 09 May 2008 16:03:14 GMT

I guess it's time for me to do some research and answer these questions in the above post. As a civilian enthusiast rather than a member of the sea services I will make mistakes but perhaps I should persevere. I don't know.
When the Germans researched Walter and closed cycle diesel drive, Walter had safety problems but high power and could drive a sub at 25 knots for six hours. Closed cycle diesel suffered in liquid form, a 5% per day boiloff rate. Seriously planned was storage...

Re: How About Eight Bow Tubes and Sixteen Vertical Launch Tubes?

feeds@yuku.com (SubsRUs) — Wed, 07 May 2008 23:55:51 GMT

01001011 wrote: In this case the proposed nuke boat would be equipped with an 'AIP' combat system.

Assuming that you are referring to your previously proposed [noisy] nuke boat with turbo-electric drive and lots of battery

Re: How About Eight Bow Tubes and Sixteen Vertical Launch Tubes?

feeds@yuku.com (westwords2020) — Wed, 07 May 2008 19:14:53 GMT

It looks like I have grossly underestimated the size of this AIP submarine. Weapons weighing five metric tons apiece have a major effect upon displacement and their torpedo tubes have the same effect. Vertical launchers have similar problems.
To accomodate two rows of 21 inch and 25.6 inch with lengths of 37 plus feet for the tubes means an even larger space for the torpedo/missile room.
I would change from a two level or platform deck arrangement of four tubes per deck I would go...

Re: How About Eight Bow Tubes and Sixteen Vertical Launch Tubes?

feeds@yuku.com (westwords2020) — Tue, 06 May 2008 15:37:38 GMT

A sub with a supply of ship killer missiles makes more sense than my huge boat. It got bigger and more grander till it sank under the weight of too many features.
Do eight tubes have a place? If you are salvoing eight ship killers like Club with subsonic cruise followed by terminal supersonic or Mach 2.9 stage to complicate defenses, I would hang myself out to dry and say yes.
Yakhont requires a too large torpedo tube so it is vertically launched so another eight missiles go out....

Re: How About Eight Bow Tubes and Sixteen Vertical Launch Tubes?

feeds@yuku.com (01001011) — Tue, 06 May 2008 13:01:42 GMT

In this case the proposed nuke boat would be equipped with an 'AIP' combat system.

Re: How About Eight Bow Tubes and Sixteen Vertical Launch Tubes?

feeds@yuku.com (westwords2020) — Fri, 02 May 2008 19:42:48 GMT

I guess I'm in the wrong here and have been shown to be incorrect in my points. You all are right and I was wrong but the discussion was useful and thought provoking.

Re: How About Eight Bow Tubes and Sixteen Vertical Launch Tubes?

feeds@yuku.com (SubsRUs) — Fri, 02 May 2008 19:24:03 GMT

01001011 wrote: (in italics)

Is there any reason for the combat system of a nuke boat being more power hungry? Is that because the designers are simply less concerned about power drain?

Yes.

The entire "approach" to designing a nuke is different from designing a non-nuke. The latter is an exercise in minimizing the...

Re: How About Eight Bow Tubes and Sixteen Vertical Launch Tubes?

feeds@yuku.com (01001011) — Fri, 02 May 2008 18:48:17 GMT

RU,
Is there any reason for the combat system of a nuke boat being more power hungry? Is that because the designers are simply less concerned about power drain? Considering the performance of a laptop today compared with a computer 10 years ago, does it help?

Westwood,
You should really think about a more realistic situation, say, the Chinese want a CVBG killer in the western Pacific. In that case, 4TT + 4-8VLS, with 12 torpedoes is enough, there is no chance to reload....

Re: How About Eight Bow Tubes and Sixteen Vertical Launch Tubes?

feeds@yuku.com (SubsRUs) — Thu, 01 May 2008 17:28:43 GMT

westwords2020 wrote: I'm not sure where to go with this. . . .

I believe that you do know -- you have already written it twice in this thread:

April 4: It seems I have made a big error or rather a compilation of errors. The moderator can close this out. I'm not posting here further. . . .
...

Re: How About Eight Bow Tubes and Sixteen Vertical Launch Tubes?

feeds@yuku.com (westwords2020) — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 19:06:29 GMT

I'm not sure where to go with this. Single hull, yes. Forty foot diameter pressure hull yes. Torpedo tubes at 650mm diameter, no. Total armanent of forty-eight stowed torpedoes and missiles, fine plus whatever is carried in the tubes. Angled tubes, yes. Shortest possible hull okay. Seperate VLS, droping that.
I wonder what advantage an increase in tube diameter would bring, if any. I was thinking of 800mm tubes able to handle twelve meter long weapons as well as fire standardized...

Re: How About Eight Bow Tubes and Sixteen Vertical Launch Tubes?

feeds@yuku.com (SubsRUs) — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 15:43:44 GMT

Interesting idea, 01001011 for, perhaps, the Chinese. (The Russians know how to build quiet submarines.) However, from a ship design point of view, nuclear-powered subs tend to be large with power-hungry combat systems. Hence, to maintain even low-speed cruise with the reactor shut down would require a very large and impractical battery bank, which would make the sub even larger than it would have been without it.

From an operational point of view, I believe that it would take an...

Re: How About Eight Bow Tubes and Sixteen Vertical Launch Tubes?

feeds@yuku.com (01001011) — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 15:01:49 GMT

RU,
I am assuming that the builder only has access to relatively noisy sub reactors (say Russia and China). Battery powered low speed cruise would help to offset this major disadvantage.

Re: How About Eight Bow Tubes and Sixteen Vertical Launch Tubes?

feeds@yuku.com (westwords2020) — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 23:05:53 GMT

I think that you are right and this is a pointless excercise now. But I have learned from the discussion and my next sub will reflect that if there is one. Thankyou and you're right about a rogue state buying this monster.

Re: How About Eight Bow Tubes and Sixteen Vertical Launch Tubes?

feeds@yuku.com (SubsRUs) — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 20:58:43 GMT

"75" wrote:

For a sub of that size, why not just build a nuke boat with turbo-electric drive and lots of battery??

Why would you put a lot of batteries in a nuclear powered sub? The whole point of nuclear power is high power for long periods of time -- submerged and independent of atmospheric oxygen. Nuclear powered subs only have batteries to "keep the lights on and restart...

Re: How About Eight Bow Tubes and Sixteen Vertical Launch Tubes?

feeds@yuku.com (westwords2020) — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 19:23:36 GMT

A sub of that sub running on closed cycle diesel and batteries with a small diesel for low speed patrol once on station is still cheaper to build than a nuclear submarine. For example, it costs 330 million dollars for the fuel cores of an aircraft carrier and a nuclear reactor I believe is a large item but I could be wrong.
My imaginary boat now has a two level torpedo room and a beam of 40 feet to accomodate the four 21 inch and the four 25.6 inch tubes with six torpedoes/missiles per...

Re: How About Eight Bow Tubes and Sixteen Vertical Launch Tubes?

feeds@yuku.com (01001011) — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 17:48:31 GMT

For a sub of that size, why not just build a nuke boat with turbo-electric drive and lots of battery??

How About Eight Bow Tubes and Sixteen Vertical Launch Tubes?

feeds@yuku.com (westwords2020) — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 01:17:40 GMT

I got carried away in my thread calling for sixteen torpedo tubes so let's scale down to eight bow tubes of 650mm calibre and at least 11.3 meters in length to accomodate the very long range antishipping torpedo and the Stallion long range ASW standoff weapon with a secondary antishipping role.
A 650mm electric ASW torpedo would be welcome. The 650mm tubes can carry liners to allow firing of the much more variety of weapons in the 533mm calibre. Russian torpedo tubes are longer...