HMS Vigil would have been escorted out of port by one of the UKs Hunter killers which sanitise the area before the boomer goes into hiding. The U.K. has a extremely capable Hunter Killer force. If you add in the type 23 Frigate which again has a world class sonar the a US Sub would I am afraid be toast.
AHQ: Could a US 'Los Angeles' class SSN trail a British Vanguard class SSBN?
- Thread starter Finbarr the Fair
- Start date
Unless spending cuts and/or accidents meant neither were available when Vigil had to sail?
HMS Trenchant was doing that exact mission in that series. She had to leave it, but another platform took over. By her mere presence in the area, Trenchant would drown out the Vanguard class.
It is worth watching to see how a real sub operates, rather than the fantasy of Vigil. Naval Twitter, btw, has been wetting itself with laughter at the series. There has been a suggestion that it might have been written by the Lazy Writers from That Mitchell and Well Look. 🤣
That wasn't the case. What happened, from what I have read, is that neither the MN, or RN missile boat heard the other. Which is why they collided. American, British and French missile boats are so quiet that they are, for practical purposes, undetectable. They are quieter than the ocean itself.
The nuclear detterent is the Number One defence priority in the UK. There is full back-up in terms of assets to protect the Vanguard boats when they sail and when they are at sea. As, observed above, when Trenchant experienced an engineering casualty that forced her off the task of providing distant escort for a V-bomber, another platform took over. The MoD will gap capabilities elsewhere, but never, never on the detterent. If an escort sub, or Type 23 is unavailable to escort a Vanguard class to sea, the sailing would be delayed. The change over between boats is staggered to take into account that there may be delayed.
The RN always has at least one bomber at sea. However, it is common to have two at sea, because it's not a case of one in, one out.
A realistic scenarion for a 688I trying to track a Vanguard class (assuming that the US Government is stupid enough to want to do it), would, IMVHO, play out like this:
An Astute class, or HMS Trenchant sails some time before the V-bomber is due to sail. She patrols the approaches to the Clyde to 'sanitise' it. To the crew's surprise, they derect a 688I, rather than the expected Russian boat. There is no USN boat due to visit Faslane, so there is puzzlement all round. The RN boat gets close to the 688I and uses its Underwater Telephone to say "American submarine, what are your intentions?"
At this point the 688I commander is in a dilema. His mission has now failed, so what does he do? All he can really do is to brazen it out and claim some sort of routine exercise and move off. If the 688I activley tries to loose the British boat, that will raise suspicion. It will bring in more British assets (Type 23 frigates, Merlin HM.2 and RAF Poseidons). There will be navy to navy contact and government to government contact, asking about why a 688I has mysteriously turned up just before a V-bomber is about to sail. The sailing of the V-bomber will be delayed. The boat at sea will be ordered to stay on patrol.
As a way of preventing a rupture between the UK and USA, the 688I will be invited on a port visit to Faslane. The closest the 688 will get to 'Vigil' will be passing each other on the surface on the Clyde.
If the US Government insists on being stupid and the 688I stays in the Clyde approaches to try and track the V-bomber, the British boat will simply blast it with active sonar while the bomber is transiting to the open ocean. RN Merlins and RAF Poseidons will drop active sonobouys on it. The defeaned 688I won't be able to hear a thing. The 688I is also likely to find it has a frigate sitting on top of it. I have read that this has been done to Soviet/Russian boats in @.
I have heard that rumour, however I've never read it in any serious sources on SSBNs. With how passive sonar works; basically its a bunch of microphones; if something is quieter than other stuff around it, then it gets drowned out. Think of it this way, if you are in a club, which has music blasting at high volume, you can't hear someone speaking right next to you, never mind across the dance floor. To follow the logic of that rumour, you should be able to hear a conversation across the dancefloor because it is quieter than the music.
An Astute class, or HMS Trenchant sails some time before the V-bomber is due to sail. She patrols the approaches to the Clyde to 'sanitise' it. To the crew's surprise, they derect a 688I, rather than the expected Russian boat. There is no USN boat due to visit Faslane, so there is puzzlement all round. The RN boat gets close to the 688I and uses its Underwater Telephone to say "American submarine, what are your intentions?"
At this point the 688I commander is in a dilema. His mission has now failed, so what does he do? All he can really do is to brazen it out and claim some sort of routine exercise and move off. If the 688I activley tries to loose the British boat, that will raise suspicion. It will bring in more British assets (Type 23 frigates, Merlin HM.2 and RAF Poseidons). There will be navy to navy contact and government to government contact, asking about why a 688I has mysteriously turned up just before a V-bomber is about to sail. The sailing of the V-bomber will be delayed. The boat at sea will be ordered to stay on patrol.
As a way of preventing a rupture between the UK and USA, the 688I will be invited on a port visit to Faslane. The closest the 688 will get to 'Vigil' will be passing each other on the surface on the Clyde.
If the US Government insists on being stupid and the 688I stays in the Clyde approaches to try and track the V-bomber, the British boat will simply blast it with active sonar while the bomber is transiting to the open ocean. RN Merlins and RAF Poseidons will drop active sonobouys on it. The defeaned 688I won't be able to hear a thing. The 688I is also likely to find it has a frigate sitting on top of it. I have read that this has been done to Soviet/Russian boats in @.
I recall reading that with the Ohio/Trident SSBN's this was actually an issue, that they were so quiet that it was easier to track them, so they had to change some things so they were not quieter than the sea
I have heard that rumour, however I've never read it in any serious sources on SSBNs. With how passive sonar works; basically its a bunch of microphones; if something is quieter than other stuff around it, then it gets drowned out. Think of it this way, if you are in a club, which has music blasting at high volume, you can't hear someone speaking right next to you, never mind across the dance floor. To follow the logic of that rumour, you should be able to hear a conversation across the dancefloor because it is quieter than the music.
I'd have to find the video but I'm sure it was by https://www.youtube.com/c/SubBrief who's an Ex Sonar man and I recall him saying that Ohios were so quiet that it was almost obvious because it showed up as nothing, and nothing was easy to track compared to the noises of the water around it.
I've heard a similar theory about stealth bombers before (they've only got the same radar return as a seagull but how many seagulls do you see on radar doing Mach 1.5?) but surely with noise if you're quieter than the sea you just get drowned out by the noisy fish between you and the sonar?
The joke/naval legend/theory is that Tridents are so quiet you track the moving spot of no background noise. Several real world problems with that. Ocean background noise isn’t always strong enough for that to work. The best aspect for this to work would be full on broadside. It would be very challenging to start and continue a track this way. The detection range would not be far at all. This would open you up to counter detection from the Trident. It would also be very hard to detect course changes. The best spot to trail a boat is directly behind it. Tridents are almost impossible to find. Because the range of their missiles is so great they operate by themselves in spots away from any other targets/boats. They go to natural circulation, put a wire out, and make holes in the ocean. It’s an interesting theory but doesn’t work in real world sub operations.
Won’t see any B-2A doing Mach 1.5 either! 😀 A modern radar would probably filter out a seagull sizes target.
However, yes, you can’t track something that’s quieter than the sound around it, by looking for a hole in the ocean. Doesn’t work like that.
A truck isn't even going to slow down the blast door if they turn the GO keys. The doors are designed to open no matter how much damage the system has received to try and block the tracks. If they do that they are only doing it for show.Reminds me of an article about when the US is testing its missile silos they park a truck over the top just in case…
Trucks Get Parked Over Air Force Nuclear Missile Silos During Tests... Just In Case
It may seem bizarre and even redundant, but the semi-truck barrier serves as the very last safety precaution against an accidental launch.www.thedrive.com
It was common for the Soviets to try and track our boomers when they left harbor. So we would have an attack boot latch on to the Soviet. According to a couple independent folks I knew sometimes there would be 4 or 5 or more in the 'Conga line'. At least once as they 'bobbed and weaved' a crunching sound was heard and suddenly there was one less member of the line.
I wouldn't be surprised if at least occasionally the other major undersea powers also joined such dance parties either by invitation or on their own. And if happened with any one nation in the lead, why not the others if for no other reason than to try to put our own breakable link in the chain.
If someone tries to use active measures to discourage anyone from following when it leaves port it would just attract everyone elses attention. It was better to get into open water and break contact. (of course sending decoys out to draw snoopers off was another tactic)
Interesting thanks. I sort of wondered what might have happened had a missile actually been launched with an armored car parked on the silo when this was reported:
Think it’s after the blast door has been opened and the missile is exposed.
I like the assumption that the US boat is 100% sure to be detected…. Once again I will point out that ALL sides favor their own side and that ALL sides are playing games so no side can ever truly know how good they are compared to the other side. For all anyone truly knows the other side may be intentionally operating at a noisier then they have to just to give the other side a false sense of security.
So while it is pretty likly that the US boat would be detected the truth is.. who knows…
So while it is pretty likly that the US boat would be detected the truth is.. who knows…
Out in the North Atlantic, yes, a 688I is less likely to be detected. Unless it runs over the SOSUS network. But in the Firth of Clyde? Where there would be lots of RN platforms with very good sonar systems? Where the seabed is probably wired up like a pin-ball machine? I'm 99.9% sure that even the best SSN would be detected.
That's the version I knew of indeed. Doesn't help either that only a handfull of people know the location of a sub on patrol within a 100km (or even larger) radius, and they are all on the sub.
Obviously, the truck isn't even in the path of the blast door... It is there to catch the missile, not the door.
You must be joking the sonar on the UKs subs is world class as is the Type 23s sonar
I’ll assume you’re speaking to the sonar comment. No, I’m not joking. Someone in the world has the best sonar. IMHO and experience it is 688i, Seawolf and Virginia class. They all have WAA and incredible processing power. That does not mean that the Astute class has bad sonar. It might be better then the US sonar, it might not be. Since I’ve only used the US sonar, I don’t know. As for the Type 23. Surface ship sonar in a word sucks. All of them. Their active sonar can be effective but gives them away. They have too much flow noise past the hull for the bow dome to work well. Their towed arrays have trouble moving above and below the layer quickly. Sub sonars have none of those problems. There is a very real reason we joke that there are only two types of ships, submarines and targets. ASW from a surface ship by itself is kind of an oxymoron.