SUBSIM Radio Room Forums



SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997

Go Back   SUBSIM Radio Room Forums > Current crop of subsims & naval games > COLD WATERS > Mods Workshop for Cold Waters
Forget password? Reset here

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-09-17, 11:30 AM   #1
XenonSurf
Sea Lord
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Germany, Italy
Posts: 1,703
Downloads: 107
Uploads: 4
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ETR3(SS) View Post
688: $900 million

Ka-25: $9 million (?)

FIM-92 Stinger: $38,000

Risking a $900 million platform, to take down a $9 million aircraft, is a good way to lose your $900 million platform.

Air assets do need to be reworked. The Soviets apparently have psychic pilots in their helos and MPAs.
The US military was never terribly concerned about the costs when designing and putting alive an attack or defense system.
In your post you forget to compare risks for the sub if a plane is not shotdown and facing a lot of torpedos versus the chance for the sub to shoot down the plane and evade successfully.
The question is if such a mounted or VLT SAM system is efficient enough to have any good chance to accomplish its job, also the major concern is its total weight, any weight surplus is a no-go for a sub, having negative consequences for its max speed and manoeuver capability. Probably the weight aspect leads to dismiss such a solution.

But the reason why SAM systems on subs are futile is a very simple one: The days where subs act as lone wolfes near the surface are years past. The modern warfare tactics make subs act in a group of other surface vessels or carrier groups with far better SAM capability. And for SSBNs stealth is prime instead of stupidly attacking some overflying planes.

This 'Lone Wolf' tactics do very well fit in a game (see Microprose Stealth Fighter F-117 and other series) also because there is less work to do for the devs.

Last edited by XenonSurf; 11-09-17 at 11:58 AM.
XenonSurf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-17, 02:44 PM   #2
Spartaner251
Watch
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: close to berlin
Posts: 18
Downloads: 6
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by XenonSurf View Post
The US military was never terribly concerned about the costs when designing and putting alive an attack or defense system.
In your post you forget to compare risks for the sub if a plane is not shotdown and facing a lot of torpedos versus the chance for the sub to shoot down the plane and evade successfully.
The question is if such a mounted or VLT SAM system is efficient enough to have any good chance to accomplish its job, also the major concern is its total weight, any weight surplus is a no-go for a sub, having negative consequences for its max speed and manoeuver capability. Probably the weight aspect leads to dismiss such a solution.

But the reason why SAM systems on subs are futile is a very simple one: The days where subs act as lone wolfes near the surface are years past. The modern warfare tactics make subs act in a group of other surface vessels or carrier groups with far better SAM capability. And for SSBNs stealth is prime instead of stupidly attacking some overflying planes.

This 'Lone Wolf' tactics do very well fit in a game (see Microprose Stealth Fighter F-117 and other series) also because there is less work to do for the devs.
don't tell russia, an S300 or S200 SAM system on a sub, just put somewhere on a coast of a nation you want to make a nonflying zone ...
Spartaner251 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-17, 09:36 PM   #3
ETR3(SS)
Ocean Warrior
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Between test depth and periscope depth
Posts: 3,021
Downloads: 175
Uploads: 16
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spartaner251 View Post
don't tell russia, an S300 or S200 SAM system on a sub, just put somewhere on a coast of a nation you want to make a nonflying zone ...
Good luck fitting that on a sub. Good luck keeping that sub alive for very long too.
__________________


USS Kentucky SSBN 737 (G)
Comms Div 2003-2006
Qualified 19 November 03

Yes I was really on a submarine.
ETR3(SS) is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-17, 11:09 AM   #4
shipkiller1
Electrician's Mate
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 136
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by XenonSurf View Post

But the reason why SAM systems on subs are futile is a very simple one: The days where subs act as lone wolfes near the surface are years past. The modern warfare tactics make subs act in a group of other surface vessels or carrier groups with far better SAM capability. And for SSBNs stealth is prime instead of stupidly attacking some overflying planes.
The US Submarine force is still a 'lone wolf' force. We have just had to integrate our operations with the surface guys in the last 20 or so years. Mainly due to TLAM.

Still, better than 80% of all deployed US submarines are independent operators. It just depends on where they going to be operating.
shipkiller1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-26-17, 01:26 PM   #5
Capt.Hunt
Loader
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 90
Downloads: 9
Uploads: 0
Default

since ESSM and SM-2/3 are VLS launched, it seems like it could be theoretically possible to retrofit onto a VLS equipped boat, but you run into problems with the guidance, both of those missiles are designed to be used with AEGIS/SPY-1 radars, which are way more sophisticated than the little surface search radar mast.
Capt.Hunt is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2024 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.