What do you think the next advancement in ASW or submarine warfare will be? Their seems to be a huge gap in lethality between subs and surface vessels.
4 u
>>32701384
Posts like this should be an instant permanent ban.
>>32701361
i dunno some kind of long range accurate means of detecting subs that's akin to radar in its reliability
>>32701361
Greater ability to out-maneuver them
>>32701361
Technology associated with submarines is so heavily classified that nobody here will be able to give you a decent answer. Very few people know and the ones that do know won't tell you.
Let's be reasonable, they're probably just gonna build a slightly smaller sub.
>>32701361
Submersible unmanned vehicles with advanced sensor suites (for elint and comint). Possibly battery operated with a deployable solar array for recharge.
Could possibly have a weaponized variant as a "suicide drone".
>>32701361
the USS freedom, i think, can just out run torpedoes.
Currently, the most effective asw platforms are aircraft (patrol planes and helps). To defend themselves, submarines will begin to carry vertically-launched surface to air missiles.
While this is within current capabilities, the sensors needed to support it have not been developed. Perhaps some form of towed/mast-mounted radar that can be extended up above the surface to achieve a lock on asw aircraft would work - basically the exact reverse of a dipping sonar array.
>>32701398
>comes to shitpost
>bitches at other shitposters
>>32701361
I wonder how effective they'll be when World War Whale is declared, and every Navy surface combatant goes full blown active search and starts sonar pinging the oceans to death??
>>32702278
Yeah, the LCS was designed to just outpace Torpedoes the moment their launch is detected.
*clunkFWOOOSH*
"Helmsman, 180 degree turn and FLANK SPEED!"
>>32703887
Short answer is "not very." Subs are like burglars: they work well in an environment where nobody is looking for them, and fare poorly once the lights are turned on.
Mass produced, reusable, networked sonar/suicide drones. How can subs even compete?
>>32703928
Depends on who's sub, really.
And how hard they wanna try
>>32704021
>8 kn/h, patrol speed
>15kn/h, cruise
What sub?
>>32704053
Not sure, honestly, i just ripped it off some site about sound trials and the differences between how the russians test vs americans.
Wait one, anon, ill dig up the link.
>>32704053
https://www.armscontrol.ru/subs/snf/snf03221.htm
Here ya go.
Looks like that graph was a generic example, but there's still some good stuff on that page if you're a sub nerd like i am.
>>32701361
I have an idea...
>>32703887
Absalon is a meme. Huge accounting farce. Whilst capable, they certainly aren't cheap.
>>32704158
I know.
But the RCN can dream.
>>32704085
>>32704101
Thanks anon.
>>32701361
>>32702046
Was going to say something like this.
Remote operation, possible remote weapons as well, but I think its more reasonable for them to have fixed wired communication.
>>32704021
>10 Db
hot damn thats quiet.
>>32703970
>reusable
>suicide
Wat
>>32702943
Already a thing.
>>32703887
Active is useless. Bounces around in sound channels. Get below the layer, your good. Don't even try to pull SURTASS.
>>32703905
SHKVAL, both M-5 and M-7, not even counting SHKVAL-E
>>32705149
They are exploring this with SEA-HUNTER
Possibly a supercavitating torpedo that is extremely small. Very small warhead as well.
To be used as a counter-torpedo, like CIWS but underwater.