PLAN Carrier Strike Group and Airwing

Re: Ideal chinese carrier thread

bd popeye said:

I don't doubt what you say about ASW helos. At all.

But an LA class sub is the greatest danger to any sub. That's what they do.

Click to expand...

A good attack sub on your case will ruin your whole day...especially an ADCAP LA...but even more so a Sea Wolf or Virginia.

Having said that, another sub does have at least some chance or prayer of countering, egressing away from, and maybe even firing on another sub that is hunting it.

If a couple of helos are hunting you after having found you...there is absolutely nothing you can do about it except go deep and totally quiet and hope they either lose you or have to leave as a result of fuel concerns.

Any sub has a lot less options against a couple of ASW helos once they have found you.

Re: Ideal chinese carrier thread

The problem of ASW helos is that they use active sonars,which means they can be heard from afar, giving their general location well ahead of any sub so that the sub can take countermeasures. Long range low frequency passive sonars have to be huge and requires a lot of juice, which means they can only be fitted on ships and subs. Especially nuclear subs. You can't carry those around in a helo. Even if found, some of the newer subs are getting pretty good in countering active echoes, like in the way they are shaped, or with newer developments in the coating. Coatings around subs are not meant for quieting, they're meant for absorbing active sonars.

Helos can only use light torpedos. That's going to have limitations on depth. Even if they can physically reach that deep, they lack the speed and endurance of heavy torpedoes which can carry more battery power or fuel and can be encased with greater protection against deep water pressures. Furthermore, the heavy torpedo can also be wire guided, which means they can be commanded guided after launch by the ship or sub (well very few surface ships carry heavy torpedos anyway like the Udaloys). The light torpedo once it hits the surface, is pretty much on its own.

So Popeye is correct. Best counter to a sub is another sub.

Re: Ideal chinese carrier thread

The problem of ASW helos is that they use active sonars,which means they can be heard from afar, giving their general location well ahead of any sub so that the sub can take countermeasures. Long range low frequency passive sonars have to be huge and requires a lot of juice, which means they can only be fitted on ships and subs. Especially nuclear subs. You can't carry those around in a helo. Even if found, some of the newer subs are getting pretty good in countering active echoes, like in the way they are shaped, or with newer developments in the coating. Coatings around subs are not meant for quieting, they're meant for absorbing active sonars.

Helos can only use light torpedos. That's going to have limitations on depth. Even if they can physically reach that deep, they lack the speed and endurance of heavy torpedoes which can carry more battery power or fuel and can be encased with greater protection against deep water pressures. Furthermore, the heavy torpedo can also be wire guided, which means they can be commanded guided after launch by the ship or sub (well very few surface ships carry heavy torpedos anyway like the Udaloys). The light torpedo once it hits the surface, is pretty much on its own.

So Popeye is correct. Best counter to a sub is another sub.

Re: Ideal chinese carrier thread

The problem of ASW helos is that they use active sonars,which means they can be heard from afar, giving their general location well ahead of any sub so that the sub can take countermeasures. Long range low frequency passive sonars have to be huge and requires a lot of juice, which means they can only be fitted on ships and subs. Especially nuclear subs. You can't carry those around in a helo. Even if found, some of the newer subs are getting pretty good in countering active echoes, like in the way they are shaped, or with newer developments in the coating. Coatings around subs are not meant for quieting, they're meant for absorbing active sonars.

Helos can only use light torpedos. That's going to have limitations on depth. Even if they can physically reach that deep, they lack the speed and endurance of heavy torpedoes which can carry more battery power or fuel and can be encased with greater protection against deep water pressures. Furthermore, the heavy torpedo can also be wire guided, which means they can be commanded guided after launch by the ship or sub (well very few surface ships carry heavy torpedos anyway like the Udaloys). The light torpedo once it hits the surface, is pretty much on its own.

So Popeye is correct. Best counter to a sub is another sub.

Re: Ideal chinese carrier thread

Helos can use their sonar passively and drop passive sonar boys, right?
So when for example escorting a convoy or taskforce, where a sub will have to maneuver (make noise), they can pick it up that way. Or if not obtain a crossfix after the big batteries of FFGs/DDGs found someting.
Or just scare them off with active sonar when hostile subs may be lying in an ambush and try to deny passage. A thing perhaps more difficult to another sub when the opponent doesn't move at all.
Those choopers are rahter safe as long as air and sea surface controll is established.
At least as long as subs don't carry SHORAD SAMs on a regular basis ...

Re: Ideal chinese carrier thread

Helos can use their sonar passively and drop passive sonar boys, right?
So when for example escorting a convoy or taskforce, where a sub will have to maneuver (make noise), they can pick it up that way. Or if not obtain a crossfix after the big batteries of FFGs/DDGs found someting.
Or just scare them off with active sonar when hostile subs may be lying in an ambush and try to deny passage. A thing perhaps more difficult to another sub when the opponent doesn't move at all.
Those choopers are rahter safe as long as air and sea surface controll is established.
At least as long as subs don't carry SHORAD SAMs on a regular basis ...

Re: Ideal chinese carrier thread

Helos can use their sonar passively and drop passive sonar boys, right?
So when for example escorting a convoy or taskforce, where a sub will have to maneuver (make noise), they can pick it up that way. Or if not obtain a crossfix after the big batteries of FFGs/DDGs found someting.
Or just scare them off with active sonar when hostile subs may be lying in an ambush and try to deny passage. A thing perhaps more difficult to another sub when the opponent doesn't move at all.
Those choopers are rahter safe as long as air and sea surface controll is established.
At least as long as subs don't carry SHORAD SAMs on a regular basis ...

Re: Ideal chinese carrier thread

True they can.

But please note, like radars, sonars are not made equal. Just because something has a sonar, don't expect to work like a massive flank sonar on a nuclear submarine. Sheer number of hydrophones count, sheer size of array (a bigger ear listens to more than a smaller ear), the amount of power being fed into the system to power the hundreds and hundreds of hydrophones, amplifiers, and not the least, the processing farm needed to process and identify, along with a massive signature database, all the sounds, isolate temperature, salinity, and acidity variations, compare the thousands of sounds heard to the thousands of sounds in the database. Every sub carries within them, what is practically an oceanographic sound laboratory. The question is whether your airborne asset is capable of not just carrying and powering sensors of this size and magnitude, but also has the enormous back end processing to match all the data inflow.

Also there are thermals and currents where temperature, salinity and acidity of the water changes, as well as schools of biologics (shrimps, squid, fish). These create layers that reflect sonar so something underneath the layer can hide from the pinging sonar on top. That's why you have to lower a sonar device underwater and listen depth by depth, at different levels. Even a helo has limited endurance hovering on top, as it listens to the sounds layer by layer. But a hunter killer sub on the other hand, can stay down deep indefinitely and patiently wait for its prey.

Re: Ideal chinese carrier thread

True they can.

But please note, like radars, sonars are not made equal. Just because something has a sonar, don't expect to work like a massive flank sonar on a nuclear submarine. Sheer number of hydrophones count, sheer size of array (a bigger ear listens to more than a smaller ear), the amount of power being fed into the system to power the hundreds and hundreds of hydrophones, amplifiers, and not the least, the processing farm needed to process and identify, along with a massive signature database, all the sounds, isolate temperature, salinity, and acidity variations, compare the thousands of sounds heard to the thousands of sounds in the database. Every sub carries within them, what is practically an oceanographic sound laboratory. The question is whether your airborne asset is capable of not just carrying and powering sensors of this size and magnitude, but also has the enormous back end processing to match all the data inflow.

Also there are thermals and currents where temperature, salinity and acidity of the water changes, as well as schools of biologics (shrimps, squid, fish). These create layers that reflect sonar so something underneath the layer can hide from the pinging sonar on top. That's why you have to lower a sonar device underwater and listen depth by depth, at different levels. Even a helo has limited endurance hovering on top, as it listens to the sounds layer by layer. But a hunter killer sub on the other hand, can stay down deep indefinitely and patiently wait for its prey.

Re: Ideal chinese carrier thread

True they can.

But please note, like radars, sonars are not made equal. Just because something has a sonar, don't expect to work like a massive flank sonar on a nuclear submarine. Sheer number of hydrophones count, sheer size of array (a bigger ear listens to more than a smaller ear), the amount of power being fed into the system to power the hundreds and hundreds of hydrophones, amplifiers, and not the least, the processing farm needed to process and identify, along with a massive signature database, all the sounds, isolate temperature, salinity, and acidity variations, compare the thousands of sounds heard to the thousands of sounds in the database. Every sub carries within them, what is practically an oceanographic sound laboratory. The question is whether your airborne asset is capable of not just carrying and powering sensors of this size and magnitude, but also has the enormous back end processing to match all the data inflow.

Also there are thermals and currents where temperature, salinity and acidity of the water changes, as well as schools of biologics (shrimps, squid, fish). These create layers that reflect sonar so something underneath the layer can hide from the pinging sonar on top. That's why you have to lower a sonar device underwater and listen depth by depth, at different levels. Even a helo has limited endurance hovering on top, as it listens to the sounds layer by layer. But a hunter killer sub on the other hand, can stay down deep indefinitely and patiently wait for its prey.