Submarine Officer 101: Too fat for SEALS, too socially awkward for Pilot

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Internet VFW > Submarine Officer 101: Too fat for SEALS, too socially awkward for Pilot

grover: Jan 23, 2002; PEW PEW PEW

bradass87 posted:

When was the last time a U.S. submarine engaged and sank another submarine?

Or for that matter, when any submarine engaged another submarine in an attack?

It's gotta be.. what, World War II?

Has there been a "modern" submarine engagement at all? We can extend the definition of modern to homing torpedos and sonar in general for the purposes of these questions, not necessarily nuclear submarines only.

And have we used the SSGN's and their bazillion tomahawks yet?

Do we really need to explain to you how strategic deterrents work?

# ¿ Apr 1, 2013 01:44

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 16, 2024 12:26

grover: Jan 23, 2002; PEW PEW PEW

bradass87 posted:

No dude, I was wondering if/when it had happened bc that would be p. loving awesome.

I'm not a D&D convert or LF refugee looking to talk poo poo, I legit wonder what any submarine engagements would'a been like.. sub on sub action I mean, at least. And I legit don't know if the SSGN's did any live shooting @ real world targets

Oh, sorry. There have been a handful of sub kills since WWII.

USS Barbel sank a freighter smuggling supplies to the North Vietnamese
USS Medregal crippled a freighter smuggling supplies to the North Vietnamese
USS Greenville sank the Ehime Maru.

None of them used torpedoes :ssh:

# ¿ Apr 1, 2013 02:06

grover: Jan 23, 2002; PEW PEW PEW

Mortabis posted:

I bet we can track them when they snorkel.

e: wait, holy poo poo, do they not snorkel?

That's kinda the whole point of AIP.

# ¿ Apr 2, 2013 03:16

grover: Jan 23, 2002; PEW PEW PEW

Fuckin' OPSEC, people. What the gently caress?

# ¿ Apr 2, 2013 10:46

grover: Jan 23, 2002; PEW PEW PEW

It makes more sense if you're skimming quickly and read it as smelling like "anime."

# ¿ Apr 9, 2013 01:02

grover: Jan 23, 2002; PEW PEW PEW

While moving on the surface, can the control surfaces on the tail act as ailerons to counteract roll and keep the boat steadier?

GAS CURES KIKES posted:

Wait.. so ballast tanks are open at the bottom?

Why the gently caress is ballast not controlled by some kind of closed system? There is some kind of concept here I'm missing.

Since you can't change the volume of the sub, the only way to control the density is to change the mass. If it was a closed system, the mass would never change.

# ¿ Apr 25, 2013 10:41

grover: Jan 23, 2002; PEW PEW PEW

Snowdens Secret posted:

No.

Why not?

# ¿ Apr 25, 2013 11:20

grover: Jan 23, 2002; PEW PEW PEW

Cerekk posted:

Because they don't move independently.

Well, that was sort of implied by "no". I was wondering why they weren' designed to move independently- seems like it would be a smart thing to do to maintain stability on the surface as well as redundancy to the fairweather planes for underwater stability.

# ¿ Apr 26, 2013 03:16

grover: Jan 23, 2002; PEW PEW PEW

Subs are more likely to be stuffed full of cocaine.

# ¿ Oct 19, 2013 01:19

grover: Jan 23, 2002; PEW PEW PEW

Baloogan posted:

That would be a fun sub to own. Just me, my submarine and ~~100kg~~ 8000kg of uncut cocaine.

ftfy

# ¿ Oct 19, 2013 01:28

grover: Jan 23, 2002; PEW PEW PEW

There was an interesting derail about ship armor and torpedoes in the armor thread earlier this summer, complete with Mk48s blowing destroyers in half: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3490942&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=5

# ¿ Oct 19, 2013 02:39

grover: Jan 23, 2002; PEW PEW PEW

Pryor on Fire posted:

If it's not classified info what is the longest amount of time a nuclear sub could remain submerged undetected? I'm assuming important engine or reactor parts start falling off after five years or something without dock maintenance? Just suppose you had infinite food stores, how long can they stay submerged?

With all these subs floating around what's is/was the protocol for a post nuclear armageddon sub crew to do? Suppose there was a massive nuclear exchange and 99% of the world was wiped out all these subs are suddenly hanging out off the coast of China with nobody left answering the radios? Are you supposed to go back to base, or keep waging war somehow?

This actually seems like a realistic scenario back in the cold war so I'm assuming there was some plan in place.

Conventional wisdom is that submarine endurance is limited by the amount of food that can be carried onboard. But that would apply to other consumables as well (kimwipes, lubricating oil, spare parts, etc). Don't think you're going to get a more specific answer for opsec or w/e.

As to Armageddon, that information is highly classified. Legend is that Margaret Thatcher's sealed letter of last resort said, simply, "avenge us".

# ¿ Oct 26, 2013 14:15

grover: Jan 23, 2002; PEW PEW PEW

They're no ordinary papertowels- they're lint-free and much softer. And cost like 3x more.

# ¿ Oct 26, 2013 20:45

grover: Jan 23, 2002; PEW PEW PEW

ded posted:

They are a bit expensive. My second captain had a hardon for NOT buying them. So any division that didn't have to cleanup hydraulic fluid didn't get the buy them and had to get rags & buckets of soap&water for regular cleanups.

Yeah, I can see this; they're awfully expensive if you don't really need them. Sailors tend to use whatever's handy, so makes sense.

# ¿ Oct 27, 2013 01:31

grover: Jan 23, 2002; PEW PEW PEW

almighty posted:

I saw that at Joel's blog. I'm quite curious as to what direction Ohio replacement program is going to take. If you ask me, just strip USAF of all the nukes and have USN handle it with boomers. You can't beat the element of surprise, both for deterrence and second strike capability.

SLBM make a lot of sense as the backbone of our nuclear forces, but there are common points of failure for the boomers that necessitate a redundant land component to maintain an effective 2nd strike strategic deterrent.

# ¿ Nov 11, 2013 23:09

grover: Jan 23, 2002; PEW PEW PEW

Sacrilage posted:

Yep. It seems unlikely that China would engage in military action when their ability to destroy our economy (granted, at a great loss to their own) involves less risk and more possibility of success.

Roughly 8% of US debt is owned to China. This 8%, however, represents 65% of China's international assets. Any war between the US and China would hurt both nations deeply, but would hurt China worse than the US.

Of course, foreign debt meets gently caress-all in any conflict that results in hurling nukes at each other. If something is worth killing hundreds of millions of people to the leaders involved, do you think trade relations or debt is going to enter the picture? Both economies would be devastated regardless.

It does, however, represent a very strong incentive to keep any isolated conflict... isolated.

# ¿ Nov 12, 2013 00:59

grover: Jan 23, 2002; PEW PEW PEW

Still, even if you've found it online plastered on a dozen sites, if it's OPSEC (or worse), you can't confirm or deny it.

# ¿ Dec 24, 2013 05:18

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 16, 2024 12:26

grover: Jan 23, 2002; PEW PEW PEW

Baloogan posted:

I stand accused of being a spy and a Canadian.

and I guess there is something hella secret about diesel subs.

Your probation was pretty epic, enough.

# ¿ Dec 24, 2013 15:41

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Internet VFW > Submarine Officer 101: Too fat for SEALS, too socially awkward for Pilot