U.S. Navy Is Hunting For a Swedish Submarine

Looks like that boat is in a floating dry dock.

Submarines can replenish out at sea from tenders. Including this one in the pictures hence extending thier time at sea.

I dont recall how long a AIP system can run on the average before it needs to be recharged/replenished or such. Can anyone fill me in here. I was thinking like a couple of weeks submerged??

Schaden ..what 688 boat were you on?? Curious here.

Thanks,
Orangetom

from:

www.naval-technology.com...

"The submarine is equipped with two MTU diesel engines and two Kockums V4-275R Stirling Air Independent Propulsion (AIP) units. The Stirling engines are mounted in elastic, soundproof modules and each provide up to 75kW. The submarine has the capacity for two weeks of air independent propulsion at a speed of 5 knots without snorting. The AIP uses liquid oxygen and diesel fuel in a controlled inert (helium) environment. The AIP liquid oxygen tanks are located on the deck below the engines. The propulsion system provides a speed of 11 knots surfaced and 20 knots dived"

With regards ASW skills, as you say the baltic countries have always been good at it due to their proximity to the former soviet union. The UK spent 20+ years just doing ASW in the GIUK gap and north atlantic. The whole fleet at the time (we still have most of it, hence the massive re-equipment programme at the moment) was rigged towards ASW or the protection of ASW assets. The invincible class, type 22,swiftsure class, trafalgar class, fort class RFA's and type 23's all had ASW as their principle use when they were designed. In fact the type 23's are about the best ASW asset currently in use (even better with type 2087 sonar systems now)

[edit on 19-4-2006 by paperplane_uk]

Paperplane is correct.

There is a reason why the large ASW exercises NATO does every year are British in design, and it is no accident almost all of the exercise instructors and specialists are Canadian, French, and British. The intensity of the British ASW training and war games are legandary in Navy circles.

That isn't to say the rest of Europe is bad or anything of the sort, most of Europe has been well ahead of the US in ASW for at least over a decade, but the clear NATO leaders in ASW training has been Canada and the UK, and the leaders in ASW technology for most of the last part of the 20th century was France.

Many independent Canadian, British, and Australian experts have noted that the amount of effort and money the USN is putting into ASW training, exercises, and technology is changing ASW as it is currently known. The US Navy is among the leaders in UUV and USV technologies through its wide array of partnerships worldwide, and made creative use of these technologies in changing how ASW will be conducted in the future.

One example is the Spartan USV, which is a cooperation between the US Navy, Royal Singapore Navy, and the French Navy.

www.mindef.gov.sg...

The Spartan USV gets real world testing in the Perisan Gulf operating from the RSS Endeavour, currently assigned to the northern Persian Gulf protecting the Iraqi oil terminals. Most people don't even realize Singapore is supporting the Iraq war, or that the French Navy has observers onboard, but real world testing in Iraq is common for these emerging technologies.

In the LCS model, for ASW warfare 2 Spartans will independently deploy towed sonar arrays for sprint-drift capability, or perform stration-keep sonar capability working as a data-relay echo reciever for USVs performing echo scans.

Interestingly enough, in the SUW module for the LCS, the Spartan USV is being designed to carry the NETFIRES missile system or a 30mm gun, which when combined with the infrared imager and a laser rangefinder / designator, synthetic aperture/moving target indicator radar, and Tactical Common Datalink (TCDL) Terminal makes the Spartan USV a nasty stealth USV able to guide anything from D-GPS munitions to LGBs with real-time BDA.

The Spartan USV is just one example of many unmanned systems the US Navy is involved in with partnerships with other nations as they change focus and improve their ASW capability. So far, the nice side effect has been enormous capability increases in both mine warfare and anti-surface warfare, 2 other areas the US Navy also needs improvement.

Spartan is basically a normal RIB with a remote control system attached. The real cutting edge work is in autonoumous vehicles.

Originally posted by paperplane_uk
Spartan is basically a normal RIB with a remote control system attached. The real cutting edge work is in autonoumous vehicles.

No one is close to lethal autonoumous vehicles though, and won't be for awhile. The AI required is still at least a decade away, at least. Man in the loop will remain for quite some time, if anything for political reasons to insure no 'accidents.'

your right in that totally autonoumous control is a while away yet. The current solution is somewhere between there and remote control, in that an operator tells it to 'go there, then do this, then go there and do that' and the machine figures how to get there itself.

Its not quite there yet tho, with such things as the loss of autosub happening. ("who put this ice here......argh....smash!!!!)

With the increase in the use of networks and an impressive development rate in underwater digital communication it is only a matter of time before auv's with sensors and even weapons aboard are deployed remote from a mother ship.

Originally posted by paperplane_uk
With the increase in the use of networks and an impressive development rate in underwater digital communication it is only a matter of time before auv's with sensors and even weapons aboard are deployed remote from a mother ship.

Interesting you say that, because the need for exactly that was the topic of the submarine event on Tuesday at the Heritage Foundation.

The event is available to be watched online at:

www.heritage.org...

The question is, would the mothership be a future Submarine Tender (the 313-ship plan includes only 2 sub tenders and 0 LCS tenders) or is it something else? Does it apply to the Sea Base model, or is it a Task Force ship? Civilian or Navy operated? How does this fit in with the SSN Viriginia class, and does it include a new manned SSK for the USN? How does the LCS fit in with the idea? Finally, how can you possibly afford persuing the concept when all the money is currently planned for Sea Base and DD(X) development?

Rhetorical questions of coarse, but questions worth asking I think.

your right they are all good questions, and i am sure somebody somewhere is desperatly trying to find the answers.

Just to clear out some obvious stuff.

HMS Gotland has been leased (with crew) for one year, a lease that just have been extended for one more year.

She's not at sea for all that time, she's a _coastal_ sub.
She's based in San Diego and is at sea for trails and excercises with different elements of the US (and others) Navy. But these excecises are quite short in time, up to some weeks.

She can stay submerged for 19 days, and carries supplies for between 30-90 days.

There's at least two different crews serving her (I think it's three) on a rotation schedule.

// hdw

"Steindl said his sailors found ways to track the Gotland during their exercises, though he declined to say how. He said the training prepared his crew well."

Thats all I needed to hear.

Train

The whole fleet at the time (we still have most of it, hence the massive re-equipment programme at the moment) was rigged towards ASW or the protection of ASW assets.

All countries of the world combined use at present 400 subs. Therefore ASW is important. I'm not saying it's the only issue about which a country's navy should care about, but it's one of those issues.

[edit on 29-7-2006 by JimmyCarterIsNotSmarter]

Originally posted by BigTrain
"Steindl said his sailors found ways to track the Gotland during their exercises, though he declined to say how. He said the training prepared his crew well."

Thats all I needed to hear.

Train

Now you only have to "rent" the new german subs to go a step further

Originally posted by BigTrain
"Steindl said his sailors found ways to track the Gotland during their exercises, though he declined to say how. He said the training prepared his crew well."

Thats all I needed to hear.

Train

That doesn't say much at all! When Ohio first put to sea, canadian submariners reported they were able to track that SSBN with their ancient Oberon class subs. Doesn't mean they were that vulnerable to all subs.

That scenerio with the Ohio putting to see and being tracked is not uncommon. IT was the same back in the day with the USS Los Angeles first putting to sea. There are often problems which are still being ironed out on Sea trials and afterwords. Sound isolation/quieting is a ever on going challange and a changing science.

Many of these problems have only been ironed out later. Surface ships too are being worked to make them more quiet...if merely from the standpoint of the quietness making thier own sonar platforms more effecient.

I could not begin to even estimate how much moneys have been spent on this know how...It would boggle the mind.

Thanks,
Orangetom

This is a good URL about this submarine.

www.youtube.com...

Sweden sucks! Why do they sell subs to iran?