NationStates Jolt Archive

Hey Everybody,

***Spoilers for Ace Combat 5***


I just got Ace Combat 5: The Unsung War almost a week ago. In the game the bad guys deploy two submarines called the Scinfaxi and the Hrimfaxi. Now these subs are amazing, they are "...submersible attack carriers."

Now I immediately remembered the Japanese attempt to deploy this type of sub (http://www.pacerfarm.org/i-400/) to destroy the Panama Canal. These boats failed utterly and were long ago forgotten. I had never considered the idea until I played AC 5. And I started kicking the idea around.

Obviously, these subs would solve a standing problem with naval operational doctrine...

+the vulnerability of carriers to cruise missiles (These things if used right can a kill a multi-billion dollar CV in no time at all.)

+and given enough time, get off a hostile shore and have attack aircraft come out of nowhere. (Shades of Pearl Harbor.)

But immediately I began to think of the many and painful obstacles to this idea.

+Size (The word big isn't big enough.)

+Stealth (There is no way something larger than a Typhoon-class is going to be quiet.)

+Speed (This thing has got to be slow, unless using magnetohydrodynamic engines, ties in with above problem)

+Aircraft Carrying ability (To carry any aircraft at all is a problem, meaning the only planes that would be feasible would be VTOL or UCAVs)

+Cost, this thing would brake the banks of all but the largest nations.

Now, given the liberties we can take with reality in NationStates I figured I could enlist the shipbuilding knowledge of other nations.

What do you think?

Bump.

Somebody help me!

Read a sci fi book about that. A Sub Carrier called the Shenandoah. The title was Starsea Invaders: First Action

Basically, from the description in the book, the landing strip unfolds and rotates to allow planes to land. Take-off was from a different section. Catapults lauch the fighters directly from the lifts. VTOLS use a different hold for quick takeoff.

It had (from memory)
4 choppers (all purpose rescue/attack)
All fighters were STOL (Short Take-Off and Landing) at least.
It didn't worry about stealth. Speed was the key.
It carried a small amout of fighters. (8 I Believe) or that was all they showed.

Upon breaching the surface, the air crew could place choppers in the air within minutes and fighters shortly after.

Can't remember the cost but it was the first of a new breed of Sub Carriers.

Hope this helps.

I don't know much about subs or navy ships, but the idea is an excellent one. Like you said, VTOL would be best for this task. I would say harriers or even just helicopters(this would allow for some diversity in mission, ie attack helis, supply helis, etc). Thats all I can think of right now. Size is definitely the biggest problem.

This really is the wrong forums for this, but I personally find that there is too much at risk to have a submersible carrier as part of my Navy. Of course, subs weren't my thing. Doujin's (http://www.geocities.com/doujincorp/doujinbb.html) were.

Primary advantage of submarines as they exist today: stealth
Primary advantage of aircraft carriers as they exist today: power
Primary disadvantage of submarines as they exist today: mostly useful against other ships
Primary disadvantage of aircraft carriers as they exist today: sitting ducks

So the goal seems to be to synthesize the stealth capability of modern submarines with the power and versatility of an aircraft carrier. I think that in theory it would be possible, but it's limitations would have to be understood. By giving an aircraft carrier the ability to leave the surface you remove the danger of it being destroyed by missles before it gets a chance to act. However, it would take a long time to raise or lower a ship of that size, and the necessary crew and equipment on the flight deck is such that if a subcarrier was attacked while on the surface it would be no better than a normal carrier. In the same sense, it would be no better than any other submarine if it went into combat while submerged. Also, the stealth capabilities of a ship of that size would be far more limited than those of a smaller sub.

So it seems to me that the greatest challenge in making a submarine carrier practical would be allowing it to dive or surface quickly as situations necessitate. I'm not sure how this could be accomplished because moving anything that size quickly is difficult, but if it could be done I think most of the other problems would sort themselves out in the design process.

Today's army places feasability and practicality before power. A big huge army can do more damage, but you also suffer more casulty. Today's war motto is "go in quietly, hit them hard, and then retreat." Once you weaken them down enough, THEN you bring in your entire force. A multi-billion dollar weapon is not practical if it is easily destroyed.

Of course, you are thinking that a underwater carrier will be by itself. In such cases, it's pointless. Too expensive, too big, too complicated. However, if you were to think of a carrier that can go underwater as a defensive measure, then it's different. A carrier can retreat underwater when it's at threat, lowering the probably of it being hit(I think). However, the carrier will still have a ring of defensive ships around it. When the carrier is not at threat, it will stay above water. This, to me, is more practical than a carrier made to be underwater constantly.

Thanks for all the input.

Actual Thinkers: Your second point is exactly why I said a submersible attack carrier, not a true submarine. Good point about this hypothetical SSCV (as I think it would be designated) having to have a battle group would rob the ship of its stealth but would protect it. I wish I had said this earlier, I was thinking this ship would have to be like WW2 subs. Stay on the surface for the majority of their times and only dive when under direct attack.

Our Earth: About the flight deck, that was part of the reason I said VTOL aircraft only. Best thing I can think of is something like ballistic missle tubes on SSBNs. Individual cells for each aircraft (which would cut down on the size of the air wing), the ship surfaces, opens the hatches, the F-35s takeoff vertically (which in turn cuts down on range and fuel levels), and move out. The landing system has to be computer control because there would be zero margin for pilot error. No bolters on this carrier.

Herzai: Only thing, if you can afford this sub, the planes have got to be the Marine Corps model of F-35. Its the only aircraft that is VTOL and can still pack a punch.

Biggest standing problem:
How do you get this behemoth under water in a hurry?

Biggest standing problem:
How do you get this behemoth under water in a hurry?

Shoot big holes in the side and break the hull in half as it sinks. It'll only take a matter of minutes to get the whole thing under water. Only challenge then is getting it back up. ;)

Shoot big holes in the side and break the hull in half as it sinks. It'll only take a matter of minutes to get the whole thing under water. Only challenge then is getting it back up. ;)

No big deal if you have a million ping pong balls, a nice long pipe, and a decent pump. :)

ROFL! Thanks. That solves that!

BTW, here is a pic of the SSCV from Ace Combat 5:

http://www.acecombat.jp/img/wp/kabe21l.jpg

No big deal if you have a million ping pong balls, a nice long pipe, and a decent pump. :) :D you watch "Mythbusters" too? :D

They actually proved that it was possible to lift a ship with pingpong balls.

Really? But we don't want to raise a ship, we want to get a very large ship underwater quickly.

:D you watch "Mythbusters" too? :D

They actually proved that it was possible to lift a ship with pingpong balls.

They could have just considered the properties of a ping pong ball, done a few calculations, and conclude that it could be done, but I suppose the experimental method makes for better television.

Really? But we don't want to raise a ship, we want to get a very large ship underwater quickly.I think Really powerful pumps and Larger valves to fill the ballast tanks faster would do it.

The poblem (if you are injecting RL physics into this) is that the rapid pressurization/Depressurizaton of the main body increases fatiuge.

Another idea is to have indoor hangers with doors that open. that way, there is nothing to stow. just close the doors and down you go. Bow launches and aft recieves landing planes.

or moving into the Sci-fi realm. Launch the planes like missles... planes are in siloes that launches them like rockets, thus the sub only shows it'self when the planes need to land. Rescue/retrieval can be done via mini-sub.

They could have just considered the properties of a ping pong ball, done a few calculations, and conclude that it could be done, but I suppose the experimental method makes for better television.True, but it was fun watching them actually use ping-pong balls to lift a boat.

and the needle in a haystack was also fun.

Hmmm, vertically launched craft does have possibilities. The only problem is whether they can generate enough thrust to go from 0 to 100+ knots on a 90 degree angle.

This would work for that:

http://www.t.kth.se/euroavia/flygetyg/images/99sommar/pogo_hovrar.jpg

Hmmm, vertically launched craft does have possibilities. The only problem is whether they can generate enough thrust to go from 0 to 100+ knots on a 90 degree angle.JATO... or Boosters that detach after launch.

If you want Anime style. a shell consisting of the booster that splits open after breaking the water surface, then the Fighter's jets take over.

JATO... or Boosters that detach after launch.

If you want Anime style. a shell consisting of the booster that splits open after breaking the water surface, then the Fighter's jets take over.

Ooh, clever! One problem is that is would be quite costly to launch a plane from underwater (every time you do it, you would have to use a booster).
Couldn't you have some kind of torpedo tube system, which would be covered when the ship is underwater? You could have regular planes stored in the tubes at 45 degrees and as soon as the ship surfaces, the tubes can be uncovered and the planes could be launched with a simple catapult system. Would that work?

Well, VTOL is the next best thing to essential; then you can keep it down to the displacement range of actual heavy submarines of today with a small number of craft (probably no more than a couple dozen, tops).

As far as surfacing and desurfacing... one evident solution is to not really bring it that far above the water. You'd want air craft that could land on the water just fine, of course. I'd almost recommend vertical deployment tubes ala missile silos, although that would be quite technically tricky. The most time intensive part is going to be collecting planes after mission.

If you only carry stores and maintainence for a couple missions, and purely use it as a strike-mission carrier, you can fit more aircraft on a smaller sub.

Ooh, clever! One problem is that is would be quite costly to launch a plane from underwater (every time you do it, you would have to use a booster).
Couldn't you have some kind of torpedo tube system, which would be covered when the ship is underwater? You could have regular planes stored in the tubes at 45 degrees and as soon as the ship surfaces, the tubes can be uncovered and the planes could be launched with a simple catapult system. Would that work?an idea, except that when the ship breaks surface, if it's even keel, it rises too slowly... and if it does an emergency surface, the angle is wrong. besides on the surface, is when the sub is most vulerable.

Specially designed fighters... higher thrust, combined with a catapult system. The air in the lauch tube is forcebly expelled with the fighter... the pressurized air breaks the water decreasing the pressure around the fighter. only problem. the sub needs to be stationary and near the surface.

Yeah, that would probably work well, although you would have to make sure that the specially designed fighters can stand up in combat against regular fighters.

Personally, if I was designing a submersible transport, I wouldn't even include aircraft. I would have a submersible troop transport for stealthy beachheads, which would be useful, less expensive and probably less trouble to design.

I don't RP though, so that's kind of academic.