Yankee class continue to soldier on as SSN

destiple · Jun 4, 2018

What if in the 80s all the Yankee class subs were converted to just SSN and had their SLBM missiles removed

even if they were not converted to Yankee " notch" configration these yankee class still had capacity to carry 18 x type 53 torpedoes and top speed of 27 knots submerged they could come close with even the most modern destroyers and frigates.Plus their nuclear propulsion gives them a lot of range.
They would have been a welcome addition to the soviet SSN fleet , and could ideally be used for ASUW missions where even their Type 53 torpedoes will give them a good chance against ASROC equipped ships ( both type 53 and ASROC roughly have the same range )

Vikingstar · Jun 4, 2018

According to Wikipedia, several Yankees were converted to SSNs. You've already noted the SSGN conversions. I've always been under the impression that the Yankees were loud and their reactors inefficent and unreliable, but I might be mistaken.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yankee-class_submarine

SsgtC · Jun 4, 2018

destiple said:
What if in the 80s all the Yankee class subs were converted to just SSN and had their SLBM missiles removed

Because by the 80s, the Yankees were meat on the table for NATO SSNs and FF/FFGs.

destiple · Jun 5, 2018

But again against second rate navies ( not frontline NATO SS or SSN) and for patrolling in secure bastions in seas close to USSR they may have been useful ?
regarding FF and FFG , not all of them had a ASW helo and those even if available would be vulnerable to land based airpower as soviets will operate close to their own shores.

SsgtC · Jun 5, 2018

destiple said:
But again against second rate navies ( not frontline NATO SS or SSN) and for patrolling in secure bastions in seas close to USSR they may have been useful ?
regarding FF and FFG , not all of them had a ASW helo and those even if available would be vulnerable to land based airpower as soviets will operate close to their own shores.

Again, by the 80s, they're meat on the table. Even without a helo, a frigate could prosecute a Yankee successfully. Especially with ASROC. The Yankees were just that noisy.

destiple · Jun 6, 2018

But ASROC range is no different than that of type 53 torpedos carried by all soviet SSN

SsgtC · Jun 6, 2018

destiple said:
But ASROC range is no different than that of type 53 torpedos carried by all soviet SSN

It's not the torpedo range. It's the fact that the frigate will detect, track, localize and attack the Yankee before the Yankee even knows the frigate is there. The first indication the Yankee will have that they've been found will be when an ASROC launched Mk46 drops into the water right on top of them. Not only were the Yankees somewhat noisy, they also had a less than stellar sonar suite.

destiple · Jun 6, 2018

^ Can the soviet surface ships and maritime patrol planes communicate with Yankees and inform them about Frigates in the surrounding areas

Gunnarnz · Jun 6, 2018

destiple said:
^ Can the soviet surface ships and maritime patrol planes communicate with Yankees and inform them about Frigates in the surrounding areas

Only if the Yankee is shallow enough to raise a radio mast. Nuclear submarines prefer to stay deep, for obvious reasons.

destiple · Jun 6, 2018

Maybe if they hide out at entry and exit points of soviet bastion seas like Baltic , Black seas , sea of Japan, Okhost where they can
1-stay shallow enough to have communications with surface forces /patrol planes to help guide them
2-land based aircover to shoo away enemy ASW helos and planes
3-in close proximity of friendly forces that can provide ASW and ASUW support
4-Divert attention of enemy FFG and DD from other more modern subs and increase their chances of scoring ( so as pawns essentially)
5-Prey on less defended or distracted ships
This seems like a less than flattering view but in a war with a big naval opponent with multiple platforms , it seems like they might have a role to play in a fairly limited defensive role
Is that a fair assessment ?

SsgtC · Jun 6, 2018

destiple said:
Maybe if they hide out at entry and exit points of soviet bastion seas like Baltic , Black seas , sea of Japan, Okhost where they can
1-stay shallow enough to have communications with surface forces /patrol planes to help guide them
2-land based aircover to shoo away enemy ASW helos and planes
3-in close proximity of friendly forces that can provide ASW and ASUW support
4-Divert attention of enemy FFG and DD from other more modern subs and increase their chances of scoring ( so as pawns essentially)
5-Prey on less defended or distracted ships
This seems like a less than flattering view but in a war with a big naval opponent with multiple platforms , it seems like they might have a role to play in a fairly limited defensive role
Is that a fair assessment ?

Not really, no. Let's go over them one by one.

1. Being shallow makes them even easier to detect. Not only on sonar, but by surveillance satellites which could locate them via radar (to communicate, the boats need to be at Periscope depth with a mast raised) or even visually (being so shallow, the boat would be plainly visible as a dark shadow below the surface).

2. If they're within range of Soviet air cover, there won't be any airborne ASW assets in the area.

3. This is a recipe for a blue-on-blue incident. There's a reason subs don't work with other assets. Mainly because it's a cast iron bitch to ID a submerged contact. Therefore, all submerged contacts are treated as hostile. Even in cases where a US SSN is escorting a CSG, they operate within a very clearly defined area. If they stray outside of that area, they risk being fired on by their own side.

4. Not really. Very, very few FF/Gs will be operating independently in a war with the WARPAC. They'll all be either assigned to a CSG or to convoy escort. Meaning the Yankee is gonna have to come to them if it wants to play.

5. Maybe in the opening days of a war before merchant shipping is organized into convoys. Then maybe they can pick one or two ships off that happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

You have to remember, the only reason the USSR converted the Yankees to attack boats is because they NEVER got rid of any kind of military hardware until it was so hopelessly obsolete that it should be in a museum.

destiple · Jun 6, 2018

^ great responses but you are assuming a WP vs NATO war , that scenario turns nuclear within days

If you take into account a conventional war only ,not involving NATO or USN lets say for instance with China or military aggression by Japan

in that scenario they do not have to deal with satellites , or worry about attacking CSG or escorted convoys

maybe the reason why soviets kept outdated stuff in service is because they faced a whole spectrum of threats ranging from primitive equipment of PLA/PLAN to technologically sound but poorly manned arab/muslim states to sophisticated hardware and superb personal of NATO.

SsgtC · Jun 6, 2018

destiple said:
If you take into account a conventional war only ,not involving NATO or USN lets say for instance with China or military aggression by Japan

in that scenario they do not have to deal with satellites , or worry about attacking CSG or escorted convoys

Don't be so sure about that. In any conflict the USSR winds up in, you can be sure that the US will provide quite a lot of intelligence to whoever is fighting them (see how the US backed Al Qaeda and the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan).

destiple said:
maybe the reason why soviets kept outdated stuff in service is because they faced a whole spectrum of threats ranging from primitive equipment of PLA/PLAN to technologically sound but poorly manned arab/muslim states to sophisticated hardware and superb personal of NATO.

No, because the US dealt with the exact same issues. Just because you're dealing with a lower level power, doesn't mean you leave the good shit home. If anything, you make sure it's front and center so you can overwhelm your enemy. As one of my instructors at the School of Infantry used to say, "if you ever find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics sucked." In other words, why make things harder than they have to be by using older, outdated equipment?

One other thing to mention, if you're fighting in the Med, the Red Sea, the Gulf, the Sea of Japan or South China Sea, you're fighting in some very shallow, restricted waters. Meaning you're ex-boomer is at a severe disadvantage. You gotta remember, a boomer is not a maneuverable boat. Putting them in any of the areas I listed is a very bad idea. Especially if you're using them as an attack boat. While the USN has deployed it's Ohio SSGN conversions there, they were sent strictly as a floating missile platform to strike land targets, and only after naval and air dominance was achieved.

gatordad699 · Jun 6, 2018

You could just about hear a Yankee at 10,000 yards with a glass against the hull. They were crazy loud.

Subs don’t have to be at PD and/or have a mast up to receive ELF and VLF signals. The have to have a wire antenna out that is close to the surface.

As mentioned, SSBNs can be a bitch keeping at PD. The flat part of the turtleback creates a suction with the surface and can suck a boomer to broaching really quickly.

destiple · Jun 6, 2018

^ How were the Delta I and Delta II? did they share the same limitations of Yankee as in loudness and poor sonar ?

destiple · Jun 6, 2018

gatordad699 said:
You could just about hear a Yankee at 10,000 yards with a glass against the hull. They were crazy loud.

Subs don’t have to be at PD and/or have a mast up to receive ELF and VLF signals. The have to have a wire antenna out that is close to the surface.
.

and that can communicate with friendly surface ships and patrol planes ?

SsgtC · Jun 6, 2018

gatordad699 said:
Subs don’t have to be at PD and/or have a mast up to receive ELF and VLF signals. The have to have a wire antenna out that is close to the surface.

Sorry, should have clarified. I was referencing two-way comms.

destiple said:
^ How were the Delta I and Delta II? did they share the same limitations of Yankee as in loudness and poor sonar ?

I believe they were quieter than the Yankee. By how much, I don't know. No idea if they were fitted with better sonar or not.

SsgtC · Jun 6, 2018

destiple said:
and that can communicate with friendly surface ships and patrol planes ?

One way only. And only VLF from ships and planes sending to the boat. ELF is extremely slow, something like one character a min, I think. Though I could be off on the actual rate. And it required truly massive shore installations to make it work.

Gunnarnz · Jun 6, 2018

destiple said:
and that can communicate with friendly surface ships and patrol planes ?

No, ELF and VLF are low bitrate methods. You need a special shore facility with huge antennae to send those signals, and the receiving antenna isn't much shorter. As I understand it, most ELF messages were short groups of characters that indicated a preset message (often something like "come to periscope depth to receive a longer message via satellite").

destiple · Jun 6, 2018

Gunnarnz said:
No, ELF and VLF are low bitrate methods. You need a special shore facility with huge antennae to send those signals, and the receiving antenna isn't much shorter. As I understand it, most ELF messages were short groups of characters that indicated a preset message (often something like "come to periscope depth to receive a longer message via satellite").

Did the soviets have those facilities ?