Was just watching Jack Ryan Season 3 and seeing the display of force and their movements causes some interesting dissonance given what we know now.

  • DigitalTraveler42@lemmy.worldEnglish
    61·
    1 year ago

    Name one advantage that diesel subs have over modern nuclear subs? Lol

    Diesel subs are loud AF from my understanding, and loud subs are dead subs according to my understanding of modern day submersible warfare.

    • Cranky_Otter@feddit.de
      16·
      1 year ago

      They are loud when they recharge, they are slow compared to nuclear subs and they carry much less armaments.

      On the other hand, when they are on battery power modern diesels can be much quieter than nuclear subs, they are much cheaper and smaller so ideal for operations in coastal waters. Which is why many (also western countries) rely on them for coastal defense.

      Economics wise: You can trade 3 diesel subs against a nuclear subs or a large warship and still come out ahead cost/effort wise.

      • DigitalTraveler42@lemmy.worldEnglish
        51·
        1 year ago

        How long do you think 1950’s era batteries last? Like in what world do you think “a 1950’s diesel on battery power surely outclasses a modem nuclear sub”? GTFO with that bullshit, lol.

        A sub on battery power is essentially in free fall depending on their ballast situation, they’re not going anywhere because they would have to turn their loud ass engines on to go somewhere, which would then alert the entire modern navy they would be up against.

        Which is why many (also western countries) rely on them for coastal defense.

        No the countries that still use those just don’t have enough money to maintain a nuclear sub fleet for what’s essentially their coast guard, it’s cost efficiency not “better”.

        All of your points are just deep stretches in vain attempts to be the “well ackschully!” Guy, or to be the contrarian throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks.

        • Hyperreality@kbin.social
          7·
          1 year ago

          the countries that still use those just don’t have enough money to maintain a nuclear sub fleet

          IRC the French have at least one diesel sub, the SMX-Ocean Range 30,000km.

          They also have modern battery tech, the money and the tech to maintain/build nuclear subs. They have existing nuclear subs. The SMX-Ocean is actually quite modern. 2017 I think. Certainly more modern than most existing nuclear subs.

          it’s cost efficiency not “better”.

          Here’s an article which explains why modern diesel subs can be quieter than nuclear subs:

          https://navalpost.com/nuclear-submarines-diesel-electric-submarines-noise-level/

          they are slow compared to nuclear subs

          I googled. 20 knots for the SMX-Ocean. 25 for France’s nuclear subs. Not a huge difference.

          • DigitalTraveler42@lemmy.worldEnglish
            22·
            1 year ago

            IRC the French have at least one diesel sub, the SMX-Ocean Range 30,000km.

            Wait so you honestly think they’re going 30,000 km on battery power?

            Do you not get that submarine combustion engines are just like car combustion engines? You generate power through the engines and that power is stored on battery to power the electrical systems and serve as a backup, battery power is not going to power the whole entire sub and magically move the sub quietly through the water, that’s not how these things work, that’s how nuclear subs work.

            My point is, you’re not going to be able to move your sub at all on battery power, at some point you will have to turn on those loud ass engines in order to move your sub, which will absolutely alert every modern sub to your location.

            • Hyperreality@kbin.social
              6·
              1 year ago

              Wait so you honestly think they’re going 30,000 km on battery power

              Obviously not, as the article I linked to mentions the range is limited in electric mode.

              battery power is not going to power the whole entire sub and magically move the sub quietly through the water,

              It will, but the range is limited. Electricity and batteries aren’t magic. We also use them to move cars.

              that’s how nuclear subs work.

              You should read the article I linked to above. Current nuclear submarines often aren’t perfectly silent. In fact, they can be louder than a modern diesel sub running in battery only mode.

              Which is likely why the French, who do have nuclear subs, chose to build a diesel sub anyway while simultaneously also working on quieter nuclear subs.

              • DigitalTraveler42@lemmy.worldEnglish
                1·
                1 year ago

                From your article:

                Diesel Electric Submarines Diesel generator machinery can cause a great deal of noise. Diesel electrics are only quiet when operating in electric mode.

                In fact, diesel boats must raise a snorkel to have intake fresh air for combustion when operating the diesel recharging the batteries and is then visible to the world.

                u212a todaro class submarine pietro venuti U212A Todaro class submarine Pietro Venuti You cannot run silently with the diesels running and charging the electrics, you can only run silently in the electric-only mode, submerged. And because that’s off batteries, your submerged endurance is limited.

                Diesel electric submarines only use diesel mode when travelling on surface, or snorkeling. However, there is the Stirling engine submarine, that can run its two propulsion systems totally submerged.

                The works on making nuclear boats quieter

                • Hyperreality@kbin.social
                  2·
                  1 year ago

                  So you agree that diesel submarines can be quieter than nuclear subs when operating in electric mode, although their range is limited.

                  That’s good.

                  I thought this was turning into one of those reddit level discussions, where people refuse to accept they were wrong, because they’d rather ‘win’ an argument by misrepresenting what the person they’re debating actually said, than have a nuanced discussion

        • Cranky_Otter@feddit.de
          1·
          1 year ago

          Dude, if someone here is “well akshually” that is surely you. When people talk about people on the internet that are annoying to meet - that’s you.

          But apart from that. You are simply mistaken in a lot of things or are projecting so hard you may as well have an HDMI input.

          Nobody said 50s era or even modern diesel subs or their other non nuclear equivalents are “better” than a nuclear sub in all ways but in some situations, e.g. coastal defense and operation sin shallow water, they may be better suited to the mission than a nuclear sub that is 4 times as large.

          In addition there are economical considerations. If I can buy 4 diesels for the price of a nuke sub it may be better for me to have 4 diesels who can lie in wait at 4 places at once.

          The question is mission fit of the asset. A ship will sink all the same whether it was sunk by a 2 billion USD Nuke sub or by a diesel on the way to the wrecker that had a really really lucky day.