Submarines for the Argentine Navy
- Thread starter Miragedriver
- Start date
Miragedriver
Brigadier
As I’ve realized that the Merosur Newspaper is not an accurate source of information. I will not quote them on anything again on this forum. Back to the topic at hand:
The role of Navies in majority of the world (with the exception of superpowers and some European nations) is not to project power, but protect their territorial waters. That is the role expected of their navies to play in their national defense.
Most of these countries do not expect to need naval gunfire to support combat ashore (a major advantage of surface ships over submarines). These countries also do not expect to contest distant sea-lanes with likely adversaries; indeed, they're likely to be confined to keeping aggressors out of their own home waters. The role described here is for the ability to deny a small patch of ocean to hostile ships. That is a role in which submarines excel, particularly diesel subs. We should not be surprised to find that's way diesel-electric submarines are popular among 3rd world nations.
Diesel-electric submarines are a relatively low tech way to maximize the naval impact of a less developed navy. The amount of work needed to prevent the diesel-electric submarines from getting shots into the high value targets can be staggering. During the 1982 South Atlantic Conflict - a single (older) un-located Argentine submarine type 209 caused the expenditure of 203 British anti-submarine weapons, with no hits. Newer diesel-electric submarines are very good; the sensors are first rate, the quieting as good or better (on the batteries, ie silent running) than the SSN’s. Diesel-electric submarines are very good at what they do, but they are very limited in what they can do. The up side is that diesel-electric submarines are cheap to buy and have small crews. The down side is that for a submarine to be effective in combat the boat needs a lot of time at sea and drills (practice, practice, practice). So far very few nations are BUILDING a REAL diesel-electric submarine force.
The role of Navies in majority of the world (with the exception of superpowers and some European nations) is not to project power, but protect their territorial waters. That is the role expected of their navies to play in their national defense.
Most of these countries do not expect to need naval gunfire to support combat ashore (a major advantage of surface ships over submarines). These countries also do not expect to contest distant sea-lanes with likely adversaries; indeed, they're likely to be confined to keeping aggressors out of their own home waters. The role described here is for the ability to deny a small patch of ocean to hostile ships. That is a role in which submarines excel, particularly diesel subs. We should not be surprised to find that's way diesel-electric submarines are popular among 3rd world nations.
Diesel-electric submarines are a relatively low tech way to maximize the naval impact of a less developed navy. The amount of work needed to prevent the diesel-electric submarines from getting shots into the high value targets can be staggering. During the 1982 South Atlantic Conflict - a single (older) un-located Argentine submarine type 209 caused the expenditure of 203 British anti-submarine weapons, with no hits. Newer diesel-electric submarines are very good; the sensors are first rate, the quieting as good or better (on the batteries, ie silent running) than the SSN’s. Diesel-electric submarines are very good at what they do, but they are very limited in what they can do. The up side is that diesel-electric submarines are cheap to buy and have small crews. The down side is that for a submarine to be effective in combat the boat needs a lot of time at sea and drills (practice, practice, practice). So far very few nations are BUILDING a REAL diesel-electric submarine force.