AHC: US Navy Acquires New Conventionally Powered Submarines

[RamscoopRaider]

So between a quarter and half the cost of a Virginia, plus starting a school to train the MMs and officers to run a diesel/electric engine (which isn't insurmountable, but ought be considered too).

Plus the R&D costs for a new class of subs, and probably some disruption to nuke boat production. This of course assumes no overruns, the Virginia's at least regularly come in on time and under budget, I doubt the USN would get that lucky twice

Of course such a sub would be half the size of a Virginia, much slower and carry half to two thirds the armament, and probably not be compatible with the Dry Deck Shelter used to deploy SEALs

 

[sparky42]

Plus the R&D costs for a new class of subs, and probably some disruption to nuke boat production. This of course assumes no overruns, the Virginia's at least regularly come in on time and under budget, I doubt the USN would get that lucky twice

Of course such a sub would be half the size of a Virginia, much slower and carry half to two thirds the armament, and probably not be compatible with the Dry Deck Shelter used to deploy SEALs

To be honest, I think all of the above to me suggests just get Allied nations to build up their SSK capabilities for choke points (for example Singapore looking at a new larger German hull for future operations) and stay with the SSN/SSBN builds.

 

[Riain]

Australia would get SSNs if we could, they're better than SSKs which are basically smart booby traps, but we'd need to build up a nuclear industry. The US has the momentum to deal with the massive cost overhead of a nuclear fleet so probably would get little to no benefit from a diesel sub fleet.

 

[sparky42]

Australia would get SSNs if we could, they're better than SSKs which are basically smart booby traps, but we'd need to build up a nuclear industry. The US has the momentum to deal with the massive cost overhead of a nuclear fleet so probably would get little to no benefit from a diesel sub fleet.

I would think you'd also need to build up public support, and get the US (I presume) to sell you the plans for the Virginia class, also given historic "issues" with costs/quality/time from the Australian yards, what would a realistic In service date be, and at what price per unit I wonder? Are the Collins replacements getting a VLS or sticking with just tubes by the way?

 

[RamscoopRaider]

I would think you'd also need to build up public support, and get the US (I presume) to sell you the plans for the Virginia class, also given historic "issues" with costs/quality/time from the Australian yards, what would a realistic In service date be, and at what price per unit I wonder? Are the Collins replacements getting a VLS or sticking with just tubes by the way?

Probably be easier just to get the nuclear variant of the Barracuda, rather than the conventional version they are buying, French tend to come with less strings than US and the Barracuda is smaller and needs less crew. I know the first conventional Barracuda variant had a VLS, not sure if the later version the Aussies are buying has them

 

[sparky42]

Probably be easier just to get the nuclear variant of the Barracuda, rather than the conventional version they are buying, French tend to come with less strings than US and the Barracuda is smaller and needs less crew. I know the first conventional Barracuda variant had a VLS, not sure if the later version the Aussies are buying has them

Fair point, wonder if the integration of US/French systems might be more of a headache with the Nuke version. Looking at it, they come out at €1.3 billion a unit, so at least 1.8 billion Australian Dollars...

 

[NoOneFamous]

Instead of 4 Kidd class destroyers, the Shah of Iran orders 4 conventional submarines which are seized by the US after the fall of Iran.

 

[JudgeKing]

In 1979, HDW offered to build some diesel electric submarines for the USN.

 

[Summoner]

Instead of diesel engines, could a future non nuclear sub be powered by gas turbines, much like surface vessels? Or would this not jive with the AIP?

 

[RamscoopRaider]

Instead of diesel engines, could a future non nuclear sub be powered by gas turbines, much like surface vessels? Or would this not jive with the AIP?

Gas Turbines are less fuel efficient than Diesels, and are most efficient at max power. Turbines advantages are in compactness and changes of speed. For subs that change speed less often, and rarely do high speed runs turbines lose a lot of edges

They are still more compact, but that is usually offset by needing more fuel and in AIP boats more air

 

[sparky42]

Instead of diesel engines, could a future non nuclear sub be powered by gas turbines, much like surface vessels? Or would this not jive with the AIP?

Gas Turbines are less fuel efficient than Diesels, and are most efficient at max power. Turbines advantages are in compactness and changes of speed. For subs that change speed less often, and rarely do high speed runs turbines lose a lot of edges

They are still more compact, but that is usually offset by needing more fuel and in AIP boats more air

Think BMT has proposed a sub with Gas turbines in the Sail with the idea that the SSK would use them for "high speed" transit and then rely on "normal" Diesels/batteries/AIP in the operational zone.

 

[Alanith]

Instead of 4 Kidd class destroyers, the Shah of Iran orders 4 conventional submarines which are seized by the US after the fall of Iran.

This seems like the most likely possibility to me. Even if I think they'd probably be fast tracked for resale to Taiwan or something.