Rumoured "mini-nuke/diesel" Submarine SSK-N(?) thread

[TK3600]

Here is the argument for smaller subs: combat attrition. Sure you can cover more space with larger sub in peace time, but when shooting begins you begin to lose units. It is better to lose SSK than an SSN if much the combat is close by.

If SSK cover 1 area at 1 cost, maybe SSN can do 10 area at 5 cost. But when most important battlefield is close by and there is a ton of attrition, 5x 1 cost unit will outlast 1 5 cost unit, despite latter's efficient coverage. If both types lose a unit, 4x SSK will cover more than 0x SSN.

This is just to illustrate the point. I dont mean anything literal. The idea is SSN being more efficient at peace might not translate into efficiency under heavy war attrition.

I envision SSKN being the similar kind of attrition resistent platform, but less restricted in range than SSK. SSN can becomes the sharp sword inflicting damage, while SSKN is like a persistent wall. They complement each other quite well.

Perhaps with advent of attrition resistemt SSKN, SSN can afford to specialize into a more elite strike platform. It can focus more on quality, knowning it can offload some duty to SSKN, thus less exposed to danger.

 

[tphuang]

I'm just using historical precedence for the littoral mission.

We asked you not do it and you still do it.

You cannot communicate effectively with UUVs using RF, seawater strongly absorbs optical signals and sound is broadband and can be distorted. There's no other way to communicate remotely with an underwater craft even in theory.
Due to poor optical and RF propagation, the only possibility of sensing the environment is sonar. Because of the requirement to remain hidden, active sonar is unwise to use. Any undersea craft is essentially blind to anything that does not make noise. Note that not making noise does not mean it does not exist - see random underwater mountains or sunken debris.

Due to multipath propagation in the littorals and a noisy environment in the littorals due to presence of commercial shipping, it is also difficult to make an AI that can usefully make choices in the absence of human intervention. The AI will be further limited because it can't actually train on data, since there just isn't a large volume of publicly available subsurface hydrophone readings for obvious reasons.

This means that, in the absence of the possibility of both remote piloting and autonomous vehicles, you need at least 1 human to pilot the vehicle. But 1 human has low endurance and uptime, as 1 human tends to need to eat and sleep. You might want more humans on board for 24 hour uptime. Starts looking awfully like a SSK at this point.

I won't go too far into this, but you are wrong about this.

Here is the argument for smaller subs: combat attrition. Sure you can cover more space with larger sub in peace time, but when shooting begins you begin to lose units. It is better to lose SSK than an SSN if much the combat is close by.

If SSK cover 1 area at 1 cost, maybe SSN can do 10 area at 5 cost. But when most important battlefield is close by and there is a ton of attrition, 5x 1 cost unit will outlast 1 5 cost unit, despite latter's efficient coverage. If both types lose a unit, 4x SSK will cover more than 0x SSN.

This is just to illustrate the point. I dont mean anything literal. The idea is SSN being more efficient at peace might not translate into efficiency under heavy war attrition.

I envision SSKN being the similar kind of attrition resistent platform, but less restricted in range than SSK. SSN can becomes the sharp sword inflicting damage, while SSKN is like a persistent wall. They complement each other quite well.

Perhaps with advent of attrition resistemt SSKN, SSN can afford to specialize into a more elite strike platform. It can focus more on quality, knowning it can offload some duty to SSKN, thus less exposed to danger.

That's the problem, SSK covers a lot less than 1. As soon as it starts transiting, it gets to PD level. Longer term, I fail to see the advantage of SSK over UUVs. Whereas I do see a purpose of having mini nukes around, because they don't have range limitations.

You can basically use mini nukes within 2nd island chain. You can have them sustain presence around Indonesia and Malacca strait. I don't see how you can have 039B do the same.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

We asked you not do it and you still do it.


I won't go too far into this, but you are wrong about this.

That's the problem, SSK covers a lot less than 1. As soon as it starts transiting, it gets to PD level. Longer term, I fail to see the advantage of SSK over UUVs. Whereas I do see a purpose of having mini nukes around, because they don't have range limitations.

You can basically use mini nukes within 2nd island chain. You can have them sustain presence around Indonesia and Malacca strait. I don't see how you can have 039B do the same.

I'm wrong about what?

Remote 2 way communication with undersea objects is a known problem and it is one of physics and not engineering.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

It is a fact that sea water absorbs short wave RF and scatters light. It is a fact that you cannot communicate with sound without making sound. It is a fact that a submarine making sounds is bad.

I'm correct until proven otherwise. Good luck getting around physics.

 

[tphuang]

I'm wrong about what?

Remote 2 way communication with undersea objects is a known problem and it is one of physics and not engineering.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

It is a fact that sea water absorbs short wave RF and scatters light. It is a fact that you cannot communicate with sound without making sound. It is a fact that a submarine making sounds is bad.

I'm correct until proven otherwise. Good luck getting around physics.

Based on what I heard, you are wrong that they are unable to communicate from under the water. I won't go beyond that. Things don't work how you think.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

Based on what I heard, you are wrong that they are unable to communicate from under the water. I won't go beyond that. Things don't work how you think.

Based on the laws of physics that is, in fact, exactly how it works. The burden of proof is on you to show something against scientific consensus.

 

[tphuang]

Based on the laws of physics that is, in fact, exactly how it works.

You are assuming they have to directly use RF underwater for communication, when they do not have to.


I'm going to stop the back and forth. Because this is going nowhere.

 

[Jason_]

How China is using SSKs right now, is there any reason China cannot replace that capability with larger UUVs in the future?

If it can be replaced with UUVs, does it make sense to have a mini nuke type in your fleet that can sustain 7 to 10 knots. Assuming of course that you can produce it cheaply enough at the existing shipyards that produce 039 series.

No UUV in existance or known to be under development are anywhere close to being able to replicate the capability of even the least capable SSK, let alone a large and advanced one as the 039B/C.

Even if the technology became available (we are talking about revoluntary advancements in energy storage, propulsion, communication, and autonomous decision making), it will take decades of experience from operating smaller, less capable UUVs before armed, autonomous long range UUV become viable.

 

[AndrewS]

A 3 tier fleet isn't that bad.

SSKs have application in super shallow littoral < 50 m ie Yellow Sea and some strait. Here it's all about numbers and maneuverability. Even North Korean SSKs have proved themselves in this regime and would be extremely foolish to discard this capability against adversary SSKs that slip past the net.

If there are enemy submarines operating in the Yellow Sea, something has already gone very wrong.

There's a narrow-ish chokepoint between Dalian and Shandong, which presumably has seabed sensors.

The Yellow Sea is enclosed by Chinese territory, so it should be a bastion where Chinese aircraft and ships can use active sonars as much as they want.

The Yellow Sea is pretty shallow and small so there's nowhere for a sub to hide, once it has revealed itself.

In any case, the Yellow Sea is that small that only 1 deployed Chinese SSK makes sense.

If you look at other shallow areas or choke points, they are further away and more exposed to enemy submarines entering.

So SSKNs would make more sense.

---

And what would an enemy submarine be trying to do in the Yellow Sea?

If it's going after a Chinese SSBN, then that SSBN can release a radio buoy and request air support to flood that target zone, if there is even a hint of an enemy sub.

 

[ACuriousPLAFan]

If there are enemy submarines operating in the Yellow Sea, something has already gone very wrong.

There's a narrow-ish chokepoint between Dalian and Shandong, which presumably has seabed sensors.

The Yellow Sea is enclosed by Chinese territory, so it should be a bastion where Chinese aircraft and ships can use active sonars as much as they want.

The Yellow Sea is pretty shallow and small so there's nowhere for a sub to hide, once it has revealed itself.

In any case, the Yellow Sea is that small that only 1 deployed Chinese SSK makes sense.

If you look at other shallow areas or choke points, they are further away and more exposed to enemy submarines entering.

So SSKNs would make more sense.

---

And what would an enemy submarine be trying to do in the Yellow Sea?

If it's going after a Chinese SSBN, then that SSBN can release a radio buoy and request air support to flood that target zone, if there is even a hint of an enemy sub.

I believe you meant Bohai Sea.

Because the Yellow Sea is actually bordered by not just China to the north and west, but also Korea to the east and a 450-kilometer wide opening to the south.

And while the Bohai Sea is entirely Chinese territorial waters (thanks to the Miaodao Islands), the Yellow Sea actually has huge spans of international waters where warships from any country can sail in.

 

[tphuang]

No UUV in existance or known to be under development are anywhere close to being able to replicate the capability of even the least capable SSK, let alone a large and advanced one as the 039B/C.

Even if the technology became available (we are talking about revoluntary advancements in energy storage, propulsion, communication, and autonomous decision making), it will take decades of experience from operating smaller, less capable UUVs before armed, autonomous long range UUV become viable.

They already use UUV extensively. As such, the expectation is that UUVs will continue to get larger and more capable.

But my question still stands. How are they using SSKs right now?

Remember, it's not just 039B/C. They have Song class still. Is there any reason a good chunk of the current roles occupied by SSKs cannot be be replaced by UUVs?

You simply don't need as many mini-nukes to replace 039B/C if you pair it up with UUVs.

I just don't see a role for SSKs in PLAN longer term if the mini nuke project is successful.