Seawolf submarine undergoing secret modernization

USS Seawolf

The USS Seawolf US nuclear submarine returned to service after repairing a month that cost 31 a month and cost $ 280 million. The Seawolf was put into service in the 1997 year and the submarine usually undergo a major overhaul and upgrade after about 20 years. However, Seawolf entered for such work earlier, and the repair itself turned out to be more extensive and expensive than usual. This may be due to the fact that Seawolf was the first in its class. It may also mean the installation of special equipment for intelligence operations. The USS Carter submarine is equipped with reconnaissance and special equipment. The Navy acknowledged that Carter was retooled for even more sensitive missions, but does not cover details.

USS Los Angeles

Twenty-nine 9000 ton Seawolf class submarines were to replace the submarines of the era of the cold war era Los Angeles class, but the Seawolf were too expensive. Thus, only three boats were built. Seawolf was created for the Cold War, it was armed with fifty torpedoes, Harpoon cruise missiles or anti-ship missiles launched through eight 660-mm torpedo tubes. The Seawolf was fast (the maximum speed was over 60 kilometers per hour) and much less noisy than the Los Angeles class boats. In order to compensate for the lack of Seawolf, the 7800 ton Virginia-class submarine, the size of the Los Angeles submarine, but with Seawolf technology, was developed. Virginia class submarines cost about half the price of the Seawolfs. This has largely been made possible through the use of many new technologies in Virginia designed for Seawolf.

USS Virginia

Currently, the United States has three classes of submarines. Most of them are 6900 ton submarines of the Los Angeles class. A total of sixty-two of these submarines were built, and the 43 are still in the ranks. Armed with four 533-mm torpedo tubes, they carry twenty-six 48 MK torpedoes or BGM-109 Tomahawk cruise missiles. The latest Los Angeles-class 31 submarines were equipped with vertical Mk 45 launchers that allow the transport of another twelve Tomahawk CUs. If they were built today, these later models of Los Angeles class submarines would cost about $ 1.5 billion each. Currently, eight Virginia-class submarines are in service, and more 24 are planned.

Comments

[tronin.maxim]

Whatever the Americans, and sometimes they have good ideas, make a submarine reconnaissance. I wish we had something like that, although who knows, maybe it does!

[Armata]

I served in the Northern Fleet. Back in 92, there were rumors about the Golden Fish project. Since the friends there still remained from them, he listened that there are already 2 of such people. It is not noticeable for most detection tools, there is only 2 minus a quiet move and high cost.

[Zlodeey]

http://topwar.ru/924-zolotaya-rybka.html

[PSih2097]

Here is a classic example - the submarine "hunter", as it was a long time ago, I don’t remember who, proved that there was no such class of submarines.

[ZloySobacka]

Nice boat, what can I say. If it had not yet been for the Americans' commitment to firing telecontrolled torpedoes + a somewhat flawed TA design that limits the speed when firing torpedoes, there would be no price for it. And so, they probably miss without a worthy opponent. Nothing, if "Ash" turns out to be what they promise about him, soon they will not be bored.

[Foamas]

Quote: ZloySobacka

somewhat flawed TA design,

What is the flaw ??

[ZloySobacka]

due to the large radius of the bow antenna of the HAK, the devices are turned in the DP by 7,5 degrees, this limits the speed of the submarine when firing a torpedo to 8 knots, otherwise the torpedo skews when leaving the TA, and besides, when firing from the TU, the speed of pl should not be more than 10 bonds, and the course cannot be changed by more than 10 grams. otherwise TU may break

[Marat]

While half of the world's people are starving or suffering from a lack of resources, these obese bourgeoisie spend hundreds of billions on weapons of aggression.

Secondly, after the defeat of our country in the Cold War, they did not reduce their military spending - they only increase it. Hugo Chavez is really right and the Iranians are Satan

[MURANO]

Quote: FoMaS

. If it weren’t for the Americans’s commitment to remote control torpedoes

With this commitment they cover us specifically.
And we still do not have a normal technical specification.

[Foamas]

MURANO, I did not write this.
In general, maybe it meant that the TA was 660 mm, but actually there were no torpedoes of this caliber in service? (use Mk-48.7 533mm, but with self-output).

[ZloySobacka]

Che we do not have it?
So far I was a "bull", I had four shots with TR, two of them were excellent. And this is from 1993 to 1995.

[MURANO]

Quote: FoMaS

I did not write this.

Weird! I generally quoted Comrade ZloySobacka I have no doubt in your competence!

[ZloySobacka]

I answer. TU - good when shooting at a hard of hearing, weakly armed and indecisive enemy. I hope you don’t think of the Americans or Russians as such? Because your own maneuver, evasion from the enemy's attack, the use of GPA, reduce the effectiveness of telecontrol to naught. A telecontrol boat, using the same Mk48, or USET-80, or TEST-71M, should paddle no more than 10 knots at a constant course and speed until the torpedo enters the target zone, posing as an ideal target. That is, up to several minutes. During this time, you can expect a lot. For example a response torpedo. By the way, the Chinese do not take telecontrols when buying USETKs with the "Physicist" equipment, and do not use it at all, considering it to be a vicious practice.

[Foamas]

The Chinese do not take the fact that our towed coils impose many restrictions, put their hose problems with them less.

[MURANO]

Quote: ZloySobacka

Che we do not have it?

We have, only this squalor.
Until now, we have used a towed boat remote control coil. The impact of the flow of water at speed leads to the twisting of the towed coil and the breakage of the telecontrol wire. The use of a long cable cable to reduce this effect eliminates the use of remote control at shallow depths and the possibility of firing with multiple torpedo salvos.
At the end of the 60s in the West, they came to a hose remote control coil boat, which remained with a shot on the rear cover of the torpedo tube (TA). In this case, the wire was etched to compensate for the post-salvo maneuvering of the submarine through a protective “hose”. Hose remote control has dramatically increased the reliability of communications, reduce speed and maneuvering restrictions, provide firing with multi-torped volleys with remote control, including at the shallowest depths. As a result, increased efficiency of torpedo weapons and significantly increased firing positions at a distance.
Even short-term remote control dramatically increases the effectiveness of salvo on submarines in real conditions, and the implementation of firing positions on surface ships, the next anti-torpedo zigzag at a distance of over 11-13 km, is possible only with remote control. And most importantly - until the mid-80s, telecontrol remained the only effective means of providing noise immunity of a volley in conditions of powerful sonar response. Homing systems in all countries until the beginning of the 80s did not have the necessary noise immunity, therefore for effective firing from the 50s the U.S. Navy had a prerequisite - telecontrol, and for surface ships - a large ammunition of PLO - the ability to carry out multiple submarine attacks.
All western heavy torpedoes and even the new torpedoes of the Chinese Navy have a remote control hose. The use of towed coils on our torpedoes is a vestige of 50 years ago. This puts Russian submarines virtually under fire from enemy weapons with much greater effective firing ranges.

Quote: ZloySobacka

USET-80

Teach materiel.

[ZloySobacka]

Thanks, of course, for the offer to teach the materiel. I really didn’t shoot Usetka, only with TESTs, but there is no difference in the TU part, that cable breaks happen, I know, but it didn’t break. According to the results of the shooting, I can say that it is better for a TEST to go to the UMC right away than a short-term TU. I. Sorry for the stubbornness, but the use of TU does not fit in with post-salvo maneuvering.

[MURANO]

Quote: ZloySobacka

but the use of TU does not fit in with post-salvo maneuvering.

With firing range TEST yes.

[bezdonnyj]

I recorded a video on the submarine of the Ash project