Was just watching Jack Ryan Season 3 and seeing the display of force and their movements causes some interesting dissonance given what we know now.

  • Jaytreeman@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    Diesel subs have some advantages over others, some distinct disadvantages too, but a few advantages

    • WindyRebel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      1 year ago

      What advantages? If memory serves correctly, they’d need a captain with a penis tattoo that says “welcome aboard” and a radar guy who can imitate whales. I’m not sure that’s so common.

      • Skua@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        At least as recently as 2005, diesel subs were the quieter option. There was that somewhat notorious story of the Swedish one that beat an American carrier group in a wargame because the Americans just couldn’t find it. I’m sure there have been developments in the equipment and methods since then - it was 18 years ago, after all - but it’s still notable enough that the Americans leased the sub from Sweden for a couple of years to practice against it.

        That said, the Swedish sub in question was packed with cutting-edge (at the time) stealth features. I suspect North Korea’s fleet is not.

        • DigitalTraveler42@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          Lol people hold on to that wargame so tightly as some Pinnacle of triumph over western armed forces, but the reality of the situation was that the sub commander in question went rogue and did something they weren’t supposed to do in order to win. Also at the end of the day it’s a fucking wargame, it’s practice, and nobody really cares how well you do in practice because it’s all about how you perform in the big game.

          Also as you noted the Americans did what we always do when situations like this happen, we game planned for never letting it happen again, this was an embarrassment for the US Navy, and you can bet it’s something they’re constantly working on never letting happen again, these are serious professionals who’s lives revolve around continuously planning ways to win against any situation while losing as few of their people as possible.

          • Shiggles@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            It sounds like the wargame did exactly what it was supposed to, people learned. All this talk of “embarrassment” is silly.

        • ramble81@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          as recently as 2005

          You do realize that’s almost 20 years ago. That’s like saying “well you realize in 1985…” Back in 2005.

          (The 2000s have been a blur for me time wise too)

          • Hyperreality@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            If I’m not mistaken, that was a Gotland Class. Built in the early 90s, so over 30 years old.

            France has at least one diesel submarine that’s decades more modern.

        • WindyRebel@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Thanks for the serious answer even when I was making a stupid joke/reference.

          As I replied to someone else, that is very interesting.

          My thoughts: It does seem extremely limited for its advantage though. The electric mode is basically a stealth option, but once they fire or do anything else then should be findable and that electric mode probably won’t last THAT long if they were being hunted actively.

      • Hyperreality@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        diesel submarines can be quieter than nuclear subs when operating in electric mode, although their range is limited.

        • WindyRebel@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Thanks for answering seriously even when I didn’t.

          Interesting that they are quieter! I never would’ve guessed that. Thanks for sharing.

          • Hyperreality@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I think the old ones are loud, but newer ones can be really quiet. IRC Sweden had one that did well in war games. Gotland class. France also has really modern ones.

            Basically they chugachugachugachuga, then go into battery mode and dissappear off sonar. Range is low obviously. Batteries don’t last that long.

            Don’t think the Russians have those though. Their navy has been a joke for over a century.

        • SokathHisEyesOpen@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Range is infinitesimal comparatively. A nuclear submarine can operate continuously under water for 6 months. An old diesel sub needs to resurface after something like 12-18 hours.

    • DigitalTraveler42@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Name one advantage that diesel subs have over modern nuclear subs? Lol

      Diesel subs are loud AF from my understanding, and loud subs are dead subs according to my understanding of modern day submersible warfare.

      • Cranky_Otter@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        1 year ago

        They are loud when they recharge, they are slow compared to nuclear subs and they carry much less armaments.

        On the other hand, when they are on battery power modern diesels can be much quieter than nuclear subs, they are much cheaper and smaller so ideal for operations in coastal waters. Which is why many (also western countries) rely on them for coastal defense.

        Economics wise: You can trade 3 diesel subs against a nuclear subs or a large warship and still come out ahead cost/effort wise.

        • DigitalTraveler42@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          How long do you think 1950’s era batteries last? Like in what world do you think “a 1950’s diesel on battery power surely outclasses a modem nuclear sub”? GTFO with that bullshit, lol.

          A sub on battery power is essentially in free fall depending on their ballast situation, they’re not going anywhere because they would have to turn their loud ass engines on to go somewhere, which would then alert the entire modern navy they would be up against.

          Which is why many (also western countries) rely on them for coastal defense.

          No the countries that still use those just don’t have enough money to maintain a nuclear sub fleet for what’s essentially their coast guard, it’s cost efficiency not “better”.

          All of your points are just deep stretches in vain attempts to be the “well ackschully!” Guy, or to be the contrarian throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks.

          • Hyperreality@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            the countries that still use those just don’t have enough money to maintain a nuclear sub fleet

            IRC the French have at least one diesel sub, the SMX-Ocean Range 30,000km.

            They also have modern battery tech, the money and the tech to maintain/build nuclear subs. They have existing nuclear subs. The SMX-Ocean is actually quite modern. 2017 I think. Certainly more modern than most existing nuclear subs.

            it’s cost efficiency not “better”.

            Here’s an article which explains why modern diesel subs can be quieter than nuclear subs:

            https://navalpost.com/nuclear-submarines-diesel-electric-submarines-noise-level/

            they are slow compared to nuclear subs

            I googled. 20 knots for the SMX-Ocean. 25 for France’s nuclear subs. Not a huge difference.

            • DigitalTraveler42@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              IRC the French have at least one diesel sub, the SMX-Ocean Range 30,000km.

              Wait so you honestly think they’re going 30,000 km on battery power?

              Do you not get that submarine combustion engines are just like car combustion engines? You generate power through the engines and that power is stored on battery to power the electrical systems and serve as a backup, battery power is not going to power the whole entire sub and magically move the sub quietly through the water, that’s not how these things work, that’s how nuclear subs work.

              My point is, you’re not going to be able to move your sub at all on battery power, at some point you will have to turn on those loud ass engines in order to move your sub, which will absolutely alert every modern sub to your location.

              • Hyperreality@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Wait so you honestly think they’re going 30,000 km on battery power

                Obviously not, as the article I linked to mentions the range is limited in electric mode.

                battery power is not going to power the whole entire sub and magically move the sub quietly through the water,

                It will, but the range is limited. Electricity and batteries aren’t magic. We also use them to move cars.

                that’s how nuclear subs work.

                You should read the article I linked to above. Current nuclear submarines often aren’t perfectly silent. In fact, they can be louder than a modern diesel sub running in battery only mode.

                Which is likely why the French, who do have nuclear subs, chose to build a diesel sub anyway while simultaneously also working on quieter nuclear subs.

                • DigitalTraveler42@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  From your article:

                  Diesel Electric Submarines Diesel generator machinery can cause a great deal of noise. Diesel electrics are only quiet when operating in electric mode.

                  In fact, diesel boats must raise a snorkel to have intake fresh air for combustion when operating the diesel recharging the batteries and is then visible to the world.

                  u212a todaro class submarine pietro venuti U212A Todaro class submarine Pietro Venuti You cannot run silently with the diesels running and charging the electrics, you can only run silently in the electric-only mode, submerged. And because that’s off batteries, your submerged endurance is limited.

                  Diesel electric submarines only use diesel mode when travelling on surface, or snorkeling. However, there is the Stirling engine submarine, that can run its two propulsion systems totally submerged.

                  The works on making nuclear boats quieter

                  • Hyperreality@kbin.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    So you agree that diesel submarines can be quieter than nuclear subs when operating in electric mode, although their range is limited.

                    That’s good.

                    I thought this was turning into one of those reddit level discussions, where people refuse to accept they were wrong, because they’d rather ‘win’ an argument by misrepresenting what the person they’re debating actually said, than have a nuanced discussion

          • Cranky_Otter@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Dude, if someone here is “well akshually” that is surely you. When people talk about people on the internet that are annoying to meet - that’s you.

            But apart from that. You are simply mistaken in a lot of things or are projecting so hard you may as well have an HDMI input.

            Nobody said 50s era or even modern diesel subs or their other non nuclear equivalents are “better” than a nuclear sub in all ways but in some situations, e.g. coastal defense and operation sin shallow water, they may be better suited to the mission than a nuclear sub that is 4 times as large.

            In addition there are economical considerations. If I can buy 4 diesels for the price of a nuke sub it may be better for me to have 4 diesels who can lie in wait at 4 places at once.

            The question is mission fit of the asset. A ship will sink all the same whether it was sunk by a 2 billion USD Nuke sub or by a diesel on the way to the wrecker that had a really really lucky day.