NationStates Jolt Archive

Super submarines, yes thats right , we have our Super-dreadnoughts, super-planes so why not a Super Sub.

Why even in real life people have tried to build Super-subs (http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/cno/n87/usw/issue_13/soviets_giants.html) . During the cold war, the soviets were primary in the experimentation of these behemoths.
The americans soon found out and so some clever sod came up with a

720 ft, 10,000 ton submarine that could carry 2240 marines and landing craft that move at 100mph. He sounds a bit crazy for the real world, but after all this is the world of NS.

So do you folks out there believe that we can make them? Mines on the drawing board. I think we can, but a few tips from ship designers especially would be useful

Put your points and views down, even try to make them.

I just felt like adding another dimension to the world of super-warfare.

EDIT: i do know that i am on the hit-list of orthodox RPers everywhere.

It's very possible to create a super submarine in terms of size and demensions. However, the idea behind a submarine is stealth, and to make a submarine larger is to reduce the amount of stealth behind it, consequently, a super submarine loses the point of being a submarine in the first place.

I too am in the process of a designing 2 large submarine... one not as quite as large as the specs you put out and one much larger. I do think they are viable, however sometimes impartical due to the large size (problems would include: larger targets, slower speed, etc...)

It's very possible to create a super submarine in terms of size and demensions. However, the idea behind a submarine is stealth, and to make a submarine larger is to reduce the amount of stealth behind it, consequently, a super submarine loses the point of being a submarine in the first place.

the one noted in the article are for transport, as it notes, they can travel under ice, cutting time dramatically. stelath would be useless seeing as these are designed for use behind lines transporting goods. plus they just look so cool

As someone has already pointed out, trying to build stealth into them would be a bit of a waste. Even with currant technology it is possible to find a submarine by detecting the displacement of water in a specific area.
Anyway back to the original question: I would suggest devising a system which would allow you to remove oxygen from the surrounding sea-water. I would also suggest nuclear powered "water caterpillar" tracks, for efficiency and speed.

One last piece of advice would be to increase the crush depth of the sub to lower than any other (not including DSRV's and similar) manned subs. This would require a double hull and some rather interesting new alloys and space-age materials.

Err... Stealth is important for submarines, very important. There's no need for additional explanation for this very obvious fact that one must understand if he can consider himself informed in terms of naval strategy. Even with cargo submarines, you still need the concealment to deliver the cargo successfully - otherwise, the submarine would just be a useless hulk of steel fodder for hunter-killer vessels and aircraft.

If a system that employs means such as the detection of the displacement of water by a submarine exists in practical terms, then I'd figure that ASW warfare will be a piece of cake. But it isn't, that's the problem.

If a system that employs means such as the detection of the displacement of water by a submarine exists in practical terms, then I'd figure that ASW warfare will be a piece of cake. But it isn't, that's the problem.

Err, not sure if this is what you're talkign about, but meh:

I've read that detection is made in large part because of the wide variance in density between the surrounding water and the air held within a ship, as variations between seawater and a solid hull are not profound enough to cause a detection. In that sense, detection is based heavily around displaced water - there even have been reports of torpedoes on active-ping (after the guiding wire has broken) attacking waves because the hills and valleys each wave forms in a storm simulate the valleys caused by a surface vessel.

i count on the fact that the submarine should be able to defend itself sufficiently. imagine it as a frigate - on terms of weaponry (AA, topedos, 5" guns, cruise missiles). that should , with accompenyment be able to defend most attacks.

Think also that this could in theory be transformed to an attack vessel, rather than just cargo. it could carry a considerable missile payload, plus room for at least a couple of 12" guns.

stealth could be achieved by radar jamming/ sonar interception. - sticking a thing that beeps on the end of a large cable and towing it behind a sub. this would only be used when teh sub is in close quarters- during sub duels- as doing this in the middle of the ocean would simply be an open invitation.

Ok, the only way you would really be able to fit 5" guns and AA guns on a submarine is if you shape the hull the shape that pre-Cold War submarines were made of. That seriously decreases velocity because it doesn't displace water pressure as well as pure cigar ships, pseudo cigar shapes and tear drop shape hulls.

The smaller they are, the easier they are to hide, and therefor, the deadlier! Just because it isn't half a kilometre, doesnt mean it can't pack a hell of a punch. Try having one submarine with the element of surprise... and load it with an isonuclear torpedoe. BIG BANG BOOM!

yes, that is my design. big Typhoon type subs, they would have to have a flat bottom anyway, to land their nose on beaches or go in a dry/wet dock.

I like the Soviet/Royal navy war designs anyway, much better than the US designs.

The smaller they are, the easier they are to hide, and therefor, the deadlier! Just because it isn't half a kilometre, doesnt mean it can't pack a hell of a punch. Try having one submarine with the element of surprise... and load it with an isonuclear torpedoe. BIG BANG BOOM!

The point of it isnt attack, its to transport, its secondary mode is attack by cruise missiles / 12" guns

Last comment:
Yes it is feasable
No it is not smart

O.K. So maybe stealth is important, and the fact that it is beneath the sea makes it easier to hide from satellites. Subs already carry the nuclur deterrent and cruise missiles, and the inclusion of AA guns would be a waste of time, money and space. A few racks of torpedoes would make mince-meat of most military shipping (and if you are unscruplous, commercial shipping to).
Sonar jamming systems could be developed, perhaps that give off a false image or broadcast back a sonar ping on a negative frequency to the one coming towards it, effectively cancelling it out, so no return noise is heard (forgive me, I am not versed in naval terms, that is my brothers area of expertise).

They've been done, yes.

Kroblexskij: Could you please put some spaces in your location? You're breaking the borders of your posts.

I thought about this today!

I've actually got planning for a sub that would be my answer to any potential superdreadnaught problems.

location - OTT yes, i hope i sorted it now

Subs and navy has always been a favourite of mine since the movie red october.

Super subs and a super dreadnought battle, Hmmm. Im investing my time into subs now, rather than Missile Cruisers.

I also had an idea for a super frigate, a Frigate/destoryer the size of an aircraft carrier.

location - OTT yes, i hope i sorted it now

Subs and navy has always been a favourite of mine since the movie red october.

Super subs and a super dreadnought battle, Hmmm. Im investing my time into subs now, rather than Missile Cruisers.

I also had an idea for a super frigate, a Frigate/destoryer the size of an aircraft carrier.


So basically, a super dreadnought with the guns of a frigate?

So basically, a super dreadnought with the guns of a frigate?

hm hm, except it is primaraly AA / Guided missiles. its useless so i gave up. It also had a STOL ski-ramp.

location - OTT yes, i hope i sorted it now

Subs and navy has always been a favourite of mine since the movie red october.

Super subs and a super dreadnought battle, Hmmm. Im investing my time into subs now, rather than Missile Cruisers.

I also had an idea for a super frigate, a Frigate/destoryer the size of an aircraft carrier.

I build advanced Corvettes, myself, one of my Corvettes once destroyed 1/2 the navy of a small nation because of a therometer.

I use missiles Cruisers based on the USS Cowpens - one of the only US ships i like.

and the Type 23 Frigates Of the Royal Navy, specifically HMS Northumberland

I am currently drawing a HUGELY in depth diagram for the super-sub. ill post some of the work here soon.

apparently it looks like - If Mondrian made Power plants

stealth could be achieved by radar jamming
...if you really insist on having some radar jammer equipment on say, the periscope mast or some other mast of a sub (easiest way for an aircraft or ship radar to detect a sub's presence), feel free. But it will be as meaningless and useless as say, putting a big loud radar jammer onto a B-2 and having it jamming ground radars everytime it is in enemy airspace

Really though, radar jamming is not a way to achieve stealth, since you must consider that radar jammers only denies the opponent radar's ability to say, detect and track individual aircraft in the air. It will still know that you are there, just that it doesn't know where exactly you are - thus defying the basic principle of stealth of not being detected at all. Further, radar jamming is also vulnerable to newer weapons that utilizes passive detection and targeting as a way of countering radar jamming - for example, the AMRAAM, which has a capability of homing on the radar jamming signals from aircraft radar jammers as a mean of targeting ("home-on-jam").

I like the Soviet/Royal navy war designs anyway, much better than the US designs.
You know, nationality is not the only factor that determines the quality and capabilities of a product. In fact, it is a useless factor.

1. yes i knew someone would come up with that point - Modern tactics are too look for a piece opf sea that is TOO quiet then go there, usually there is some kind of jammer.

2. I have given up on stealth really now.

3. nationality has no play if the americans made a sub that looked good i would say that, its the style i perfer.

I would like to make a super-submarine. I have been chewing on the idea for about 5 weeks now. It would be hard, but not impossible.

the designs coming on the way.

well its about a fifth done after a couple of hours.

OOC: The Corporation currently has 2 Torment class Fussion submarines, they are currently undergoing sea trials and have the capacity for two Transport VTOLS or 4 Attack VTOLS, this would be classed as a super sub, and runs silently using twin caterpiller engines similar to those used by the Red October

OOC: I build Super-subs only as a prototype and proof of concept vessels. The idea behind them is transport without risking Line of Sight detection and I have used them during the Montignac Civil War to transport large numbers of supplies. Their stealth abilities beyond Line of Sight are laughable compared to RL and NS subs. They are only useful when you have complete Naval superioity, and the enemy doesn't possess even basic SONAR tech (RADAR is not as useful underwater) (jamming SONAR means putting out dozens of loud drones everywhere to fill enemy screens) or Anti-Sub Missiles. Then Supersubs are useful.

From what I have gathered you want to build a Battlecruiser that can submerge itself. Well be my guest, they would be like WWII U-Boats, ships that occasionally go underwater for attack runs. Any nation that has invested in a MT/PMT navy could easily strike it down, only useful against the smaller nations.

The point of a super-submarine is not stealth.

The point of a super submarine is to surface, launch missile salvo upon missile salvo (Or, alternatively, heavy arty, if you go in the 100k+ ton range), then submerge when the enemy missiles come close.

Proceed to point and laugh.

Yes, I know it would be excessively vulnerable to depth charges etc.. So? It's not like they're going to be a huge problem when they're 500km or more away from the opponent. Disregarding missiles with depth charge warheads, of course.

Besides, shinyness doesn't have to make sense. It's just supposed to be shiny.

~ Submersible Strategic Engagement Unit Disproportional Application of Force, semi-ooc

Well, you could make a super submarine, but you throw away the submairne's advantage - stealth. If you want to launch missile spam then you can do it much more easily using arsenal ships, and much more cheaply as well. TBH, I dont think it's a very good idea at all, especially as a single penetrating hit on a sub removes a lot of its ability to resubmerge.

...And you still need to worry about targeting with a sub 500km away :p Anyone say, complete exposure to aircraft?

OOC: The Corporation currently has 2 Torment class Fussion submarines, they are currently undergoing sea trials and have the capacity for two Transport VTOLS or 4 Attack VTOLS, this would be classed as a super sub, and runs silently using twin caterpiller engines similar to those used by the Red October

length/ dimensions, armament, etc crew numbers.

My guess at a super submarine would be anything about 230m+

The one im doing at the moment is about


Draft - 22m
length - 370m
beam - 34m
crew 350 - 75 officers
speed - 23kts
armament -


a tri pressure-hull encased in an outer shell, armoured for ice breaking / bumps.
The two outer shells are for storage of equipment, stores and troops, with their compartments and the Hold.
The inner one is for the Crew and their equipment, the hulls are connected by passages and bulkhead doors. Between the hulls is space for liquid goods and missile tubes also Ballast tanks and Air tanks.

Hydraulic lifts take heavy stuff to the top deck.and lifts are located along the length to take people to other decks.
The two nuclear reactors are located in massive bulkheads to the rear of the ship underneath the Aft Mast, which also houses the engines and heating, the Brig is located towards the extreme rear.
Radar is located in the armoured base of the mast, the control tower is above it. Officers quarters are located in the fore mast of the middle hull.


EDIT: SUCESS (http://img61.imageshack.us/img61/1820/supersubmarine0gk.png) , its only done a bit but its ok

...And you still need to worry about targeting with a sub 500km away :p Anyone say, complete exposure to aircraft?Of course the Disproportional Application of Force wouldn't surface with planes overhead (It would most likely sink, all things considered). The thing is, over the distances in question, it is vaguely likely that the planes will need their time, too. And then there's the possibility of anti-air defences. If they could mount cannons on early-age submarines...

Mind, my personal solution would be tiny subcraft/ crates left on the surface, each of them holding a couple SAMs, as submarine-mounted stuff would have problems when the submarine is, well, submerged, and staying on the surface kind of defeats the point... Not particularly useful in heavy sea/ bad weather, but better than nothing.

Mind, my personal solution would be tiny subcraft/ crates left on the surface, each of them holding a couple SAMs, as submarine-mounted stuff would have problems when the submarine is, well, submerged, and staying on the surface kind of defeats the point... Not particularly useful in heavy sea/ bad weather, but better than nothing.

This is a creative solution. Replace the Missile tubes wtih Buoy deployers, put them on a string, perhaps a small engine to spread them outa nd reduce chance of hit to hte mothership. Paint them with camoflauge, and mount weapons on them.

I just finished a sub for Earth V - how interesting this should come up - I believe a super sub is possible, but I wouldn't use it for anything except transportation of goods/people etc. in areas of the ocean I fully controlled - they are too easily spotted, hunted down and destroyed by enemy vessels.

That said, here's the sub I came up with:
Finalized Production Specs
Length: 387 ft.
Beam: 41 ft
Submerged Displacement: 9,300 long tons
Draft: 44 ft.
Nuclear Powered Propulsion (see below for details)
Stealth Technology: (see below for details)
Speed: 30 knots (41 knots w/ sub-jet enabled - see below)
Crew: 204
Cargo Capacity:
1.8 million gallons of oil, gas, or marine fuel
9,000 gallons of potable water
1,000 tons of ordinance
301 tons of provisions
Armament: (see details below).
Operating Depth: 1800 feet
Material: High Yield-80 (HY-80) steel alloy

Details
Stealth (sonar sound absorption capabiliy):
Exterior Fiberglass "Foam" coating
Peak Absorption Coifiecient: 1.95
Overall Absorption Coificient: >0.85
Tensile Strength: 3,000 psi
Pore Size: 25 ppi
Propulsion
Dual rendundant nuclear reactor system
W.M.D., Inc. sub jet propulsion capability (sub jet propulsion uses the equivalent of a jet fighter's turbo-fan to provide propulsion. However, the cavitation effect of the engine is significant and easily detected by sonar. The speed at which a sub moves with the sub jet enabled is great though. Sub jet engines should be engaged only for purposes of high speed escape or travel. Use of the sub jet engine in combat situations will all but assure enemy targeting of a sub's location).
Armaments & Defensive measures
Four 660-mm torpedo tubes
50 Tomahawk cruise missiles or
50 Harpoon antiship missiles or
50 Mark 48 ADCAP torpedoes or
35 Mark 69 ADCAP torpedeos or
up to 100 mines
Further Systems
http://img57.imageshack.us/img57/7198/ssubsystems6br.jpg
http://img400.imageshack.us/img400/2153/whittierssub4fq.jpg

hm looks nice, but the hull shape will make it hard to control, esp. if it is very big. a typhoon shape is best for the large Super-Subs. that shape will be very hard to put into dry dock or land on shallow flat beaches

hm looks nice, but the hull shape will make it hard to control, esp. if it is very big. a typhoon shape is best for the large Super-Subs. that shape will be very hard to put into dry dock kr land on shallow flat beaches

It's just barely bigger than a RL SeaWolf class sub.

It's just barely bigger than a RL SeaWolf class sub.
oh ok, i have no idea of length in feet. but still, the landing and dry dock will be a problem. the one i designed has a flat bottom, armoured for beach landing/ dry docks

Super submarines, yes thats right , we have our Super-dreadnoughts, super-planes so why not a Super Sub.Because, like all the other super-things, they're a bad idea. A sub's advantage is stealth, and a huge submarine will not be stealthy, especially if you also try to make it fast. That huge submarine will be easily detected, attacked by ASW aircraft (the missile subs) or quiet sub (huge ASW subs), and then sink very quickly, as subs aren't very tough. Longer subs are also more likely to run into the ocean floor, so it might not even make it to the combat area.

after flicking through the naval stratergy threads i came across another idea for this.

Landing supplies after an amphibious attack, when you dont have the port at first, then bring the port with you, in the form of a Super-Submarine.

They managed it with the mullberries in june 1944 so why not today.

Underwater-ports don't make that much sense, disregarding Underwater-Bubbleresque subaquatic colonies...

Given that you'd need to get the supplies onto the beach, anyway.

This is why the mullberries were, uh... not submarines, come to think of it.

not underwater. float it offshore when you have the beachhead established. it would only be temporrary untill a port was captured. the things big enough to be a port. but then its big enough to be attacked, but hey as i said before it should contain enough air defence to deal with most attempts

And why would you make it a super-submarine when it wont submerge, anyway? o.O*

Ok... so what's the advantage in it being a submarine?

i dont know, its just another use for it.

im sort of thinking thats its useless but looks cool now :(. well im going to make one and put it on a poster on every street corner of my capital. along with the PA system.