New Sub.

Red October!

"According to the U.S. Navy, none of what you are about to see... ever happened."

I'm kind of surprised the Swedish Navy would 'lease' their prize sub to the U.S., with the express intent of the USN to learn how to detect and kill these subs!

I'm also impressed with some of the Swedish Navy's technology. VERY advanced. Check this out:

 
Air Independent Propulsion has a long history
 
From Wikipedia:

Stirling cycle engines

The Swedish shipbuilder Kockums has constructed three Gotland class submarines for the Swedish Navy which are fitted with an auxiliary Stirling engine which uses liquid oxygen and diesel fuel to drive 75 kilowatt generators for either propulsion or charging batteries. The AIP endurance of the 1,500 tonne boats is around 14 days at five knots (9 km/h).
Kockums has also delivered Stirling engines to Japan. The new Japanese submarines will all be equipped with Stirling engines. The first submarine, Sōryū, in the class was launched on 5 December 2007 and were delivered to the navy in March 2009.
 
Interesting. Is there any information available on the costs of production, operation, etc.?
 
AdamZ said:
Yeah go figure.
Click to expand...

Either they were proud enough of their technology that they couldn't resist showing it off (and felt safe doing so to the US), or they needed the money to finance other security enhancements that they felt were more important.

I'm also left wondering whether their success at evading our detection was accurately reported by our guys. I wouldn't put it past the US forces to pretend that they couldn't track this type of sub when we had some "top secret" counter technology that we didn't want the rest of the world to know about.
 
gismo said:
Either they were proud enough of their technology that they couldn't resist showing it off (and felt safe doing so to the US), or they needed the money to finance other security enhancements that they felt were more important.

I'm also left wondering whether their success at evading our detection was accurately reported by our guys. I wouldn't put it past the US forces to pretend that they couldn't track this type of sub when we had some "top secret" counter technology that we didn't want the rest of the world to know about.
Click to expand...

Considering that most of the noise is from propellers (as I understand it) - and it seems likely that batteries / electric would make less noise than a Sterling engine :dunno:

(LOX / Diesel would extend the underwater range / duration compared to batteries)
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
Considering that most of the noise is from propellers (as I understand it) - and it seems likely that batteries / electric would make less noise than a Sterling engine :dunno:

(LOX / Diesel would extend the underwater range / duration compared to batteries)
Click to expand...

Yeah, I suspect that during "silent running" the sub runs solely on battery power.
 
The problem is that electric boats are very hard to track in any event. The key has been that in the past the length of time that a boat could operate on batteries was very limited, With the new AIP engine that limit is now weeks instead of hours.
 
jtheune said:
The problem is that electric boats are very hard to track in any event. The key has been that in the past the length of time that a boat could operate on batteries was very limited, With the new AIP engine that limit is now weeks instead of hours.
Click to expand...

I was under the impression that AIP didn't really lengthen the time a sub could continuously operate on batteries, just the time that it could remain submerged. I'd expect that running the Sterling engine would produce more noise than the electric motors alone. Perhaps that's not true since there's no combustion event inside the cylinder of such an engine.
 
gismo said:
I'm also left wondering whether their success at evading our detection was accurately reported by our guys. I wouldn't put it past the US forces to pretend that they couldn't track this type of sub when we had some "top secret" counter technology that we didn't want the rest of the world to know about.
Click to expand...

You should also question the source. When the Air Force was pushing the F-22, they staged excercises where the Indian (?) AF "defeated" our F-15's in a big exercise. Of course, the F-15's were playing with both hands tied behind their backs, but the initial information from the Air Force managed to leave out that information and use the whole thing as justification for more F-22's.

The Navy has an agenda to push as well...
 
gismo said:
Either they were proud enough of their technology that they couldn't resist showing it off (and felt safe doing so to the US), or they needed the money to finance other security enhancements that they felt were more important.

I'm also left wondering whether their success at evading our detection was accurately reported by our guys. I wouldn't put it past the US forces to pretend that they couldn't track this type of sub when we had some "top secret" counter technology that we didn't want the rest of the world to know about.
Click to expand...

or, the USN doesn't have the ability but wants people to think
the new subs can be tracked.

or ....
 
kyleb said:
The Navy has an agenda to push as well...
Click to expand...

Say it ain't so! :rolleyes:

You heard the part about how pitifully underfunded our ASW forces are now? Just guessing, but I think that was the message.
 
Read the book, "Blind Man's Bluff".
 
Joe B said:
Say it ain't so! :rolleyes:

You heard the part about how pitifully underfunded our ASW forces are now? Just guessing, but I think that was the message.
Click to expand...

Thinking that, I wonder how the USN got the P-8 ?
 
I don't get it. The Navy has been tracking nuclear subs for decades. Why is this such a big threat all of a sudden. Are we worried about the Evil Swedish Empire?
 
steingar said:
I don't get it. The Navy has been tracking nuclear subs for decades. Why is this such a big threat all of a sudden. Are we worried about the Evil Swedish Empire?
Click to expand...

LOL! They're probably worried about a sub launched pickled herring-based bioweapon. Or MIRVing Swedish meatballs. From a high enough altitude, they could raise a nasty welt.


Trapper John
 
The facts

Nuke boats are noisy, reactor driving generator to produce power, a/c, air cleaners, etc. However submerged range is virtually unlimited so the boats were designed for a high underwater cruise speed, long patrol duration but not great at sneaking around.

Diesel / Electric boats are very quiet when they want to be. Battery driving Electiic motor at low speed and few propellor RPMS make them hard to detect. The disadvantages have been limited battery life forces you to run surfaced or near the surface with a Snorkel so that air breathing engines can be run for a) increaed speed and b) charging of the batteries. A side problem in WWII technology is that sea water + lead acid battery = chlorine gas. Boat is excellent going undetected when submerged but has a limited patrolling time Gato had about a 60 day limit and limited submerged duration Gato was about 48 hours max at minimum battery load and obnoxious conditions, no A/C, fresh air, etc. Plus boat desing included motor intake and exhaust requirements which limited depth on dives.

AS best guess

With new battery technology and a a non oxygen buring CO2 engine for recharging a Stirling-Electric boat would make a much better hunter killer than a Nuke. While retaining the deep diving and higherspeeds of a nuke boat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top