Aphibious warfare using the submarine??

Has anyone talk of the possibility of using submarine as a tool to land ground forces? I am pretty sure it has been discussed. Why are they not suitable? New technology should give subs ability to move very close to shalow waters and land amphibious tanks and vehicles. The stealth is a big bonus to any amphibious operation.

normally that would be used to insert special forces. i dont think its feasable to ferry over tanks and vehicles as it either makes the sub lose mobility and stealth or they sub has to be big and that'll lead to non-stealth / very expensive. its much more feasable to use ships although once you've established naval and aerial supremacy, you could then always use subs to ferry over additional men, doubt it'll make much of a difference though considering all the boats u can gather off the shores, not to mention your going to win most cases if you have naval and aerial supremacy.

I am thinking of a small mechanized task force that can deal a peavy puch with much surprise. It may cost a hell lot to use sub to land them but if it can complete an objective that can lead to a bigger conventional landing force it may be worth while. The stealth of the sub would of course be compromised during the last few minutes before landing, but it still will achieve the surprise effect.

mechanized infantry are heavy infantry, and heavy infantry are very vulnerable without support, ie. if you insert it and leave it exposed in enemy territory. imo, if you want to attack taiwan, missles, rockets, and arty bombardments can pulverize the entire country easily, not to say that is going to win u the war. on another note, much of agressive campaigns have got to do with surprise anyway. the french army was more capable than wehrmacht but they adopted a wrong strategy. whilst when all was seemed lost in korea(kroean war), the UN code breakers deciphered the KPA communications and was able to pin point the exact locations of which they were going to attack. the result was the attack which was thought to be able to push all allied forces out of korea was repeled and KPA left exhausted from pushing too fast.

This idea was formally proposed as far back as Febuary 1946 by the then US Marine Commandant. 3 submarines, the SS313, 315 and 317 were converted for amphibious roles. They were designated APSS, and the SS313 and 315 could carry 120 men, 31 tons of cargo, a LVT with a jeep on it and 21 tons of deck cargo. SS317 could carry 300 tons of cargo. They were found very useful for small scale raiding that more missile submarines were converted for Special Force operations. The SSGNs can be seen as their descendants.

You're going to have fun loading APC/IFVs into any non-Typhoon submarine and in any sort of numbers that would deliver any sort of effective mechanized assault. Special ops relies on stealth and mobility to take out infrastructure and unhardened, high value targets and using submarines to deliver them has been used and accentuates this advantage. However, sublifting mechanized infantry adds no value to the mission. You can't exactly move in enough troops to hold a beachhead with submarines and there's limited value in other missions with submarine-based troops.

Re: Amphibious warfare using the submarine??

Well this idea has some merit but really the technology does not exsist. There is no sub large enough. Convert something Typhoon or Borei sized to this task is a good place to start. But to really be feasible you're gonna have to have an even larger boat, with some sort of landing craft within it. Not exactly the quietest boat around eh?

When would one use these sub-based Marines? I can see them being used to act as the 1st wave in a more conventional attack, using surprise to throw enemy resistance off balance and then being relieved by surface-based landing forces. You could even overrun a small island, given the element of surprise. Surprise is really the only advantage of these hypothetical craft. You are taking a more vunerable platform, and inserting less troops, for the element of surprise.

Our very own Jeff Head goes into quite a bit of detail about amphib-subs in his book Dragon's Fury. There's a link to it in the Members Club Room. It's got all sorts of stuff about this.

I know not of a submarine big enough to hold a tank, let alone an opening. Maybe Typhoons and striped down Oscars. If you release your tank on the surface, there is no stealth. If you release a K-21 filled with Helium submarine, it's probably going to sink still.

Kongo said:

This idea was formally proposed as far back as Febuary 1946 by the then US Marine Commandant. 3 submarines, the SS313, 315 and 317 were converted for amphibious roles. They were designated APSS, and the SS313 and 315 could carry 120 men, 31 tons of cargo, a LVT with a jeep on it and 21 tons of deck cargo. SS317 could carry 300 tons of cargo. They were found very useful for small scale raiding that more missile submarines were converted for Special Force operations. The SSGNs can be seen as their descendants.

Click to expand...

Anybody know if these submarines are still in use today? What kind of technology would be helpful for this type of submarine to work effectively?

They are.................sunk.
If you look at pictures of the three subs, they are sonic nightmares!
There is no stealth in them, only Davy Jones' Locker.
(How did they manage to load a LVT in it anyway?)

Japan also made a lot of carrier subs for aircraft. The I-400, the biggest known (by me at least) of them all, carried 3 WW2 aircrafts. It was a good sub then, but it's also a sonic nightmare if you look it up. The tube that carries the 3 airplanes takes up a lot of space from the sail. (I know not whether it weakens the sail, however.)

I guess you can have a large SSBN, take out the SLBMs, and give it an Ohio or semi-I-400 treatment, but the forces that you plan to land are going to be too small to make a significant(this depends on how you fight) but definitely too big to be supported (especially with vehicles, which need A LOT of support, and since this is a stealth mission, the sub is not going to be there.