Advertising - the engine of commerce, or bezrybe and cancer fish

The great and mighty American fleet is in a panic. Russian submarines scare American sailors so much that navy command decided to fight with them to create an unmanned ship.

The ship, which can be controlled at a distance and thereby exclude the probability of the influence of the human factor with active opposition. More precisely, if you believe the American edition of The National Interest, the ship-robot, capable in the future to work completely autonomously, without human intervention.

In principle, it is quite possible to create such a ship. In the American edition we are talking about the "sea hunter". The ship is fully automated, operating in offline search mode, while under the control of operators. The length, according to US sources, is about 40 meters. Displacement 145 tons. Sailing distance to 10000 miles. Travel speed to 27 nodes.

In general, the creation of ships that could ensure the safety of larger ships is a really relevant topic. The same sea hunters, if shipbuilders fulfill all customer requirements, will be able to track modern submarines quite successfully. And do it off the coast of any country.

At the same time, such ships are cheap enough to operate. The modern destroyer of the United States, again according to the Americans, costs the taxpayers 700 thousands of dollars a day. The unmanned "sea hunter" will cost only 15-20 thousands per day.

The main headache of Americans today is not only our "black holes", but also the fast-growing submarine fleet of China. The time when the Chinese submarine fleet could be treated with humor passed. The Chinese have played with pleasure the role of the "industrial zone" for the USA and now possess an excellent industry and sufficiently qualified scientific personnel.

Keeping autonomous ships in the Black Sea is stupid. Even with the use of Turkish ports, such ships will be destroyed in the early hours of the conflict. But off the eastern coast of Eurasia, these ships are very useful. Controlling the seas in this region is becoming increasingly difficult.

In case of danger, they will be able to quickly leave the zone of shelling in the Japanese or South Korean ports. And at the same time, having a sufficiently small draft, submarines will be tracked even at shallow depths. Where the destroyers do not work.

By the way, according to the plans of the People's Republic of China, by the year 2030 there will be up to 75 modern diesel-electric submarines in this region. It is doubtful that these new boats will be inferior to the Russian or American. And the presence of serious weapons actually blocks the use of AUG.

Last year, the US Navy ordered just one such ship. However, this year the order will be increased. How much is not yet clear. Most likely, everything will depend on the practical results of using drone.

And what about the main competitors of the Americans? It is by the actions of competitors that one can often judge the prospects of the proposed projects. It is clear that the emergence of data on some new developments, encourages engineers and designers to search in a given direction.

We do not have information about Chinese unmanned surface ships. About the creation of a mini submarine is. Exactly the same information is about Russian projects. In particular, on the mini-boats "Piranha" reported many publications. It is doubtful that both we and the Chinese ignored promising and cheap development.

So why is the American Navy paying so much attention to these robots? Has the idea of ​​world domination taken hold of the American admirals so much that they no longer see everything else? Or vice versa, do admirals think so perspectively?

Neither one nor the other. The matter is much more prosaic. Robotic ships will be engaged in what the hydrophones of the SOSUS system have been doing up to now. It was this system with the use of a multitude of hydrophones that for a long time made it possible more or less to track the vessels of a probable enemy near the borders of its own territorial waters.

Modern boats, alas, this system turned out to be too tough. Currently, most hydrophones are conserved. Therefore, the ships will continue to cruise along the shores of the United States in the hope of catching boats.

Experts talk about the terrible Russian "Varshavyanka" and similar Chinese submarines. However, I mentioned Piranha a little higher. And for good reason. Most likely, a robot ship will not be able to catch mini-boats. Although it will be known after the end of the test.

Yes, and already known boats will be able to successfully leave this hunter with a nose. Hearing this "rumbling from under the arms" acoustics can be much earlier than the hunter hears "game." Again, hope for super modern equipment? Which will be ...

Information about the new ship to the public was provided by a fairly serious resource, The National Interest. It was the analysts from this publication who spoke about the new robot ship as ideal weapons against Russian diesel-electric submarines. But a simple question arises: is there an ideal weapon?

So far, we can only say that the American fleet purchased a new ship for 25 million dollars. The ship is interesting. But will he be able to complete the tasks assigned to him while the question is.

Comments

[alstr]

There are errors in the article:
1. From the surface you can track ONLY the submarine to a certain depth, which is different for each place. therefore, drones can only fight in shallow water, and not even. It should be understood that where the destroyer does not pass, the submarine will not pass either. And even a mini, because she needs substantially greater depth.

2. The drones will be an easy target anyway. For example, China will be able to use any obsolete aircraft with obsolete missiles to destroy them, because drones have no weapons. A submarine can use small-caliber torpedoes. We are silent about surface ships.

3. They will not be able to hide in the ports of Korea and Japan. they will be destroyed there. Yes, and just do not have time.

There is another nuance that a submarine will detect this drone in motion earlier than it is a submarine. Those. so that he picks up the submarine and it does not detect it, it is necessary that the drone does not move, i.e. would be an analog of a stationary hydrophone. But hydrophones were placed under water and at different depths. and here only on the surface and not very deep. Those. no better than hydrophones from aircraft.

Yes. Do not forget the now fashionable electronic warfare

[dauria]

Acoustics will be able to hear this “rumbled from under the armpit” much earlier than the hunter hears “game”.

But doesn’t attacking such a drone mean discovering yourself? That is the question. Yes, and the cost of the goal is scanty. The boat, of course, will hear earlier both the destroyer and this drone. But if there are 20 drones instead of one frigate? They will connect the actions of the boat at least by speed of movement. Once a small cheap steamboat of 800 tons with 16 knots and one 100 mm cannon, remade from fishing, it forged the “wolf packs” precisely because of its mass and became popular in England as we have the T-34. Do not forget about it.

[ZVO]

Quote: alstr

Yes. Do not forget the now fashionable electronic warfare

You haven’t lost your mind in this eulogy of EW. life-giving?
What is EW in the aquatic environment, you yourself asked such a question?

[alstr]

EW is useful for suppressing communication channels through which the drone is controlled (it is not underwater).
In addition, electronic warfare also exists in water. For example, you can clog a certain area with noise and everything that is behind it will be heard much worse.

[ZVO]

Quote: alstr

EW is useful for suppressing communication channels through which the drone is controlled (it is not underwater).
In addition, electronic warfare also exists in water. For example, you can clog a certain area with noise and everything that is behind it will be heard much worse.

Who will score this area will not give himself away by anything, no?

[andrewkor]

"Varshavyanka" off the coast of the United States, you can’t get up! It’s necessary to have people brave enough. People can also understand “Danes and various other Swedes”, to the extreme British with Turks, but the USA, Karl!

[Lopatov]

In fact, everything is not so curly as it seems to the author.

First of all, hunter ships of small displacement and in large numbers by default will seriously limit the capabilities of submarines. Any, including atomic.
Secondly, it is cheaper than using aviation for this, and even more so building large submarines. Therefore, such hunters can build a lot more
Thirdly, robotic hunters will have by default much greater autonomy than habitats of a similar displacement. Which again will help to ensure a greater "density" of such submarines.

leave the firing zone

But why?
After all, "flocks of hunters" will be covered by warships and aircraft. You can destroy the "hunter", thereby identifying yourself. And it will turn into a virtual exchange. A relatively cheap robot for a warship, submarine or plane.

[NEXUS]

Quote: Spade

First of all, hunter ships of small displacement and in large numbers by default will seriously limit the capabilities of submarines. Any, including atomic.

They will not limit, just as the SOSUS system did not limit the movement of our submarines at one time. Why? Yes, because the water is layered and heterogeneous. It is because of this that our diesel-electric submarines were nicknamed Black Holes because they go into layers of a different density ...

[Lopatov]

Quote: NEXUS

They will not limit, just as the SOSUS system did not limit the movement of our submarines at one time.

- SOSUS stationary, sub robots, no.
--SOSUS takes a long time, submarines robots- no
--SOSUS is just listening, sub robots have much more detection capabilities, including active sonar and towed HAS. To protect against which, through the "layering and heterogeneity" you need to know the depth at which the axle box is located. underwater vehicle. Which is simply impossible.

[NEXUS]

Quote: Spade

-SOSUS only listens, sub robots have much more detection capabilities, including active sonar and towed hydros. To protect against which, through the "layering and heterogeneity" you need to know the depth at which the axle box is located. underwater vehicle. Which is simply impossible.

Ask Rudolph how many times he went through this SOSUS system, which, as the mattresses themselves were convinced, is ineffective and excessively expensive to maintain. That is why, if sclerosis does not fail me, it was mothballed in 11 years. And he went through it and paved the way for Antey (project 949A)

[Lopatov]

Quote: NEXUS

Ask Rudolph how many times he went through this SOSUS system

Atlichno. That is, if the store’s alarm system turned out to be ineffective, it was robbed, then Russia needs to abandon the production of signal mines, I understand correctly?

[NEXUS]

Quote: Spade

Atlichno. That is, if the store’s alarm system turned out to be ineffective, it was robbed, then Russia needs to abandon the production of signal mines, I understand correctly?

First, look at how much mattresses this SOSUS system cost, including the price of these same buoy sonars and their maintenance, and what they received for the money at the exit, and then draw an analogy.

[Lopatov]

Quote: NEXUS

You first take a look at how much mattresses cost this system SOSUS

Yeah ... twenty years ago, the store’s alarm device was quite expensive, so Russia should stop producing signal mines.

Although here is more likely. Passive radio intelligence tools like Avtobaza are too expensive and cannot calculate modern cruise missiles and planes like the F-22, so Russia should stop developing and producing radars.

[Sanichsan]

this is only part of the reason. also take a look at the spaces that need to be controlled. then we estimate the detection radius of such an apparatus and their number necessary to control this ocean space and it becomes sad, or rather we have fun
and this is without taking into account possible breakdowns and storms that this unit will not survive. so that 15-20 thousand is the price of its service in ideal conditions ... Americans generally like to plan for ideal conditions

[domokl]

Quote: SanichSan

without taking into account possible failures and storms that this unit will not survive. t

It is estimated by Americans that the robot stably works offline up to 5 points, even up to 7. Autonomy time, with complete disconnection of control systems from the coast or other vessels to 2 months or 10000 miles.
But the fact that these fry will have to cover ALL the US coast, in my opinion puts an end to the whole project. Separate bases are possible. But the coast ... Hy ... Money is not enough to buy so much. Even though the price is promised to be reduced in serial production to $ 20 million.

[Sanichsan]

Quote: domokl

According to American estimates, the robot steadily works offline up to 5 points, even up to 7.

Well, according to American experts, last year they successfully tested missile defense by shooting a barrel with a parachute so that before the start of operation, we do not know. as well as the zumvolt’s iron, they painted chic driving characteristics, and as a result, wanders from port to port for repairs ... well, there is at least someone from the crew, and then no one is supposed to.
and imagine that his "Russian hackers" soprut!

[Winnie76]

Quote: Spade

First of all, hunter ships of small displacement and in large numbers by default will seriously limit the capabilities of submarines. Any, including atomic.

Any weapon limits the enemy to something. It’s just that if this vessel moves, it detects it much further. If it hangs in place - why is it better than a buoy?

Quote: Spade

Secondly, it is cheaper than using aviation for this, and even more so building large submarines. Therefore, such hunters can build a lot more

A moot point. These vessels will have to be serviced, moreover, at sea. Everything breaks from time to time. In the clear ocean you will not apply (not quantitatively pull) only in narrowness, straits, in shallow water. Accordingly, there is a risk of sabotage. How long to swim in a motorboat and slap aboard a mine. Or say winding a grid of screws. Or let’s say EW to correct GPS, then the kirdyk boat.

Quote: Spade

Thirdly, robotic hunters will have by default much greater autonomy than habitats of a similar displacement. Which again will help to ensure a greater "density" of such submarines.
leave the firing zone
But why?
After all, "flocks of hunters" will be covered by warships and aircraft.

Those. all the same, you will have to keep ordinary ships in the zone with less autonomy and normal GAS. At least for cover. And then the meaning of this flock?

[Lopatov]

Quote: Winnie76

It’s just that if this vessel moves, it detects it much further.

Let them discover. This is not scary.

Quote: Winnie76

A moot point. These vessels will have to be serviced, moreover, at sea.

Ship Dock. The technology has long been proven.

Quote: Winnie76

Those. all the same, you will have to keep ordinary ships in the zone with less autonomy and normal GAS. At least for cover. And then the meaning of this flock?

The fact that ships will need a couple of orders less when controlling the same water area.
The complex is working, do not forget it.

[Andrey NM]

For every unmanned anti-submarine hunter there is another unmanned hunter who will be cheaper than this hunter ...

[Paul zewike]

Interesting! But a decent CEO won't turn this boat over?

[exo]

If the boat turns out to be as effective as its SOSUS time, then it will create many problems.

[NEXUS]

Quote: exo

If the boat turns out to be as effective as its SOSUS time, then it will create many problems.

SOSUS turned out to be extremely inefficient and that’s why it was mothballed. All our submariners knew very well where the boundaries of this system were and passed it very well and without problems. At the same time, in order to create a more or less continuous line in the Pacific, Atlantic oceans, even mattresses don’t have so much money.

[domokl]

Quote: NEXUS

If, the ship will be as effective as its time SOSUS

The problems ended when the third generation submarine appeared. Nexus rights one hundred percent

[Lopatov]

Quote: NEXUS

SOSUS turned out to be extremely inefficient and that is why it was mothballed.

And therefore it was supplemented with the SURTASS system 8))) And the "canned" SOSUS was modernized. And then they combined both systems through IUSS. Which not only collects data from hospitals and mobile devices and processes them, but also provides the information received to subscribers.

They also supplemented it all with coastal sonar monitoring systems FDS (stationary) and FDS-D (stationary, designed for quick deployment on a theater). Then we supplemented it with the rapidly deployable underwater lighting system ADS ...
And now they are going to supplement all this wealth with robotic ships with active-passive ASG. I draw your attention to "add" and not "replace"

[exo]

“The problem is extremely complex and new for us, and therefore we will not regret the efforts and means to solve it. We will give both people and ships. The result is important! ”
Commander S.G. Gorshkov
Before the advent of 3rd generation boats, it was a serious problem. And it took a lot of money to solve it. I think that we managed to find out the effectiveness of the system only after the end of the Cold War. Before that, it kept us in good shape.

[Curious]

Interestingly, the American sailors themselves know that the author of the VO site entangled a panic in the US Navy. They were at least notified. And maybe they don’t know that it’s already necessary to be afraid.

[surovts.valery]

Quote: Paul Zewike

Interesting! But a decent CEO won't turn this boat over?

She just won't fit in there. A decent hull, with a detection range under ideal hydrological conditions of two to three dozen kilometers, or even less, weighs several hundred tons, occupies huge volumes and consumes a lot of electricity (our Polynomian EMNIP on 1155 BOD weighs about 1000 tons. )
Another expensive toy of American admirals.

[ZVO]

Quote: surovts.valery

Quote: Paul Zewike

Interesting! But a decent CEO won't turn this boat over?

She just won't fit in there. A decent hull, with a detection range under ideal hydrological conditions of two to three dozen kilometers, or even less, weighs several hundred tons, occupies huge volumes and consumes a lot of electricity (our Polynomian EMNIP on 1155 BOD weighs about 1000 tons. )
Another expensive toy of American admirals.

Amerskiy AN / SQS-53 - which, to put it mildly, is "not inferior" to the Polynom product - weighs only 27 tons ...
Which was also created back in 1972 on the element base of the 60s.
Since...
have you read about Moore’s law at least once?

[Gorbaty]

Today, it weighs about 800 kg with all the details.

[Prutkov]

And how, in that case, the safety rules for navigation will be implemented if even ships under the control of experienced crews collide at sea? Or will the Americans again shout "about dangerous approaches and dangerous maneuvers" near their peacefully moving ship?

[domokl]

I've also neighing. Estimate, civilian ship. At the meeting there is a "flying Dutchman" without a crew ... Horror

[Lexus]

For now - this is a technology demonstrator. The “BPA robot-airplane” bundle may turn out to be quite effective in the future.

[domokl]

By the way, it is this bundle that they plan to use in the Pentagon. One of the admirals let it slip.