French SSN Programme

[riksavage]

SSN Astute Nuclear Powered Attack Submarine

7, 800 t,110 personnel, length 97-metres. 29 knots dived, weapons fit: Tomahawk Block III, 6 x 533mm torpedo tubes for missiles and Spearfish torpedo - total of 36 carried

SSN Barracuda Nuclear Powered Attack Submarine

4, 100, 60 personnel (2 x crews), length 85-metres, 25 knots dived, weapons fit: Naval Scalp, 4 x 533m torpedo tubes – 18 total carried, SM39 Exocet.

Question: looking at the new French and UK SSN programs I was struck by the difference in size and weapons fit between the two classes. I was wondering why the French, having chosen to build a new generation of Nuclear boats with long endurance and global reach, didn’t go for a bigger class?

Looking at the stats taken from Naval.Technology.com the French vessel is smaller yet has ten more crew (assuming the Astute number does not refer to just one of two crews on board), why would this be the case?

[riksavage]

Ignore my last, the French boat will have a total crew of 60 divided into two crew watches compared to 110 on the UK boat.

Still appears small for a nuclear boat though when compared to US/UK designs!

[WillS]

Question: looking at the new French and UK SSN programs I was struck by the difference in size and weapons fit between the two classes. I was wondering why the French, having chosen to build a new generation of Nuclear boats with long endurance and global reach, didn’t go for a bigger class?

1: Cost: the Astute boats, and other boats of that size are very expensive (very good, but very expensive) and the French navy have the same resource allocation problems that other European navies have.
2: The Mediterranean: The French have a long Med coastline, its a major area of operations for them. Smaller boats are better suited to Med/litoral operations.

WillS.

[contedicavour]

I would only add that the Barracuda SSNs will be already a lot larger than the current Rubis class and will thus represent a significant improvement in size. Performance-wise, they will embark SCALP cruise missiles vs the Rubis' Exocet SM39 and new torpedoes to replace the obsolete F17P in the Rubis.
So I would compare Barracuda vs Rubis not vs the RN Astute.

cheers

[Waylander]

What is the most modern Torpedo used by the french navy?

The F17P is as you said becoming old. With other countries fielding much newer torpedoes on their subs.

[riksavage]

How does SCALP compare to block 4 Tomahawk – payload and range for example?

Will the French boats use non-hull penetrating optical senses instead of traditional periscopes?

I’m sure the Barracuda class will be a considerable step-up when compared to Rubis, how many of the former are they planning to build?

[Falstaff]

What is the most modern Torpedo used by the french navy?

The F17P is as you said becoming old. With other countries fielding much newer torpedoes on their subs.

They will use the Black Shark Torpedo according to naval-technology.com (http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/barracuda/) I think that Torpedo is comparable to the DM2A4, the Greeks use them for their U-214s.

[swerve]

How does SCALP compare to block 4 Tomahawk – payload and range for example?...

Ask MBDA. No published data for Scalp Naval. This is what their website says about it.

http://www.mbda-systems.com/mbda/site/FO/scripts/siteFO_contenu.php?lang=%7Blang%7D&noeu_id=178

And for a bigger version of the picture on that page - http://www.eads.com/xml/content/OF00000000400004/3/05/41329053.jpg

[Waylander]

Thanks for that. :)

[DoC_FouALieR]

Ok ok let me clear some points about our new SSN programm.

6 boats are going to be build, replacing 6 old generation Amethyste SSNs.

All I can say now is that the total weapons aboard the Barracuda class SSN is going to be 20, including:
-New version of the Exocet SM 39.
-A new heavyweight torpedo, which will not going to be the Blackshark.
-The Scalp Naval cruise missile, the range of this new weapon (this is not a direct adaptation of the air-launched cruise missile Scalp EG) is reported to be around 600 nm. Payload could be the same as the airborne missile.

These boats are going to be much bigger than the Amethyste class, but less men are going to operate them thanks to improvments in automated systems and new "user friendly" combat systems.

Submerged maximum speed is going to be more than 25 knots.

Comparing to the Astute class. What strikes me is that the current Trafalgar class has been commissioned after the Amethyste class but is going to be replaced before. Why? Because the French Navy does not have much more money to build more capable subs. We have to do with what we have. And while other countries do not have any problem in buying foreign military stuffs, we in France are specialist in national programm, like the Rafale, the Leclerc MBT, the M51 nuclear missile, torpedo, missiles of all kind, etc etc.. It costs much more money! That's the price for our independance...
Personnaly I think we could evolve.

[harryriedl]

Ok ok let me clear some points about our new SSN programm.

6 boats are going to be build, replacing 6 old generation Amethyste SSNs.

All I can say now is that the total weapons aboard the Barracuda class SSN is going to be 20, including:
-New version of the Exocet SM 39.
-A new heavyweight torpedo, which will not going to be the Blackshark.
-The Scalp Naval cruise missile, the range of this new weapon (this is not a direct adaptation of the air-launched cruise missile Scalp EG) is reported to be around 600 nm. Payload could be the same as the airborne missile.

These boats are going to be much bigger than the Amethyste class, but less men are going to operate them thanks to improvments in automated systems and new "user friendly" combat systems.

Submerged maximum speed is going to be more than 25 knots.

Comparing to the Astute class. What strikes me is that the current Trafalgar class has been commissioned after the Amethyste class but is going to be replaced before. Why? Because the French Navy does not have much more money to build more capable subs. We have to do with what we have. And while other countries do not have any problem in buying foreign military stuffs, we in France are specialist in national programm, like the Rafale, the Leclerc MBT, the M51 nuclear missile, torpedo, missiles of all kind, etc etc.. It costs much more money! That's the price for our independance...
Personnaly I think we could evolve.

not entirely true the Trafalgar and swiftsure classes are staying in service its the boats which haven't been upgraded are being replaced by the astute class

[riksavage]

The following provides an overviw of the planned Astute fleet introduction and retirement of older classes. I doubt we will see all planned Astutes, so the Trafalgar class batch 1's will remain in service for some time.

Possible road map for RN SSN force levels based on data available early 2006
Year Submarine Event Number in fleet
2006 Sovereign Decommissioned
2006 Spartan Decommissioned
2008 Superb Decommissioned
2008 Astute Delivered
2008 Trafalgar Decommissioned
2010 Sceptre Decommissioned
2010 Ambush Delivered
2011 Turbulent Decommissioned
2011 Artful Delivered
2013 Tireless Decommissioned
2013 A-04 Delivered ?
2015 Torbay Decommissioned
2015 A-05 Delivered ?
2017 Trenchant Decommissioned
2017 A-06 Delivered ?
2019 Talent Decommissioned
2019 A-07 Delivered ?
2022 Triumph Decommissioned

[BKNO]

WillS 2: The Mediterranean: The French have a long Med coastline, its a major area of operations for them. Smaller boats are better suited to Med/litoral operations.

Very relevant point here...

In fact there is a REAL issue as far as size is concerned with the MN SSNs.

France doesn't operate SSKs anymore but many of our sensitive bases, like flight test centers are close to the litoral both Atlantic and Mediterranean.

MN weapons tests are done close to Corsica...

This means that one very important aspect of the MN mission is detection and hunt of potentially hostile small subs in ELINT/SINGIT missions.

The maximum autonomy of 45 days for the Rubis is of course a lot shorter than its nuclear propulsion capabilties would allow and its combat persistence quiet low, passed the eralier noise problems it still demonstrated a lot of qualities in these waters.

Barracuda hydrodinamic design is optimised for a maneuvrability equal or superior to that of the rubis class while its endurence (Crew) goes from 45 days to 75 days.

This will make escort of the SNLEs a lot easier too...

In short, MN have NO needs for a SSN the class of Astute or Virginia and Barracuda size (4,765 tons)/endurence/combat persistance are tailored to MN requierements.

As for comparing it to Astute, there is at least THREE technologic generation of difference bewteen the two.

Astute is an old design with upgraded avionics, our National Thales is upgrading the sonar suite/combat system and that of Barracuda is not even designed yet.

Its weapon system architecture will based on that of the latest SSKs but that's all.

The reactor isn't in its operational design form either, its demonstrator have just been runing for less than a year.

It will be built in 100 HLES or higher grade (120 or 130 HLES are developed in France), a technology even the US havent mastered yet...
http://www.netmarine.net/bat/smarins/triompha/technique/index.htm

riksavage Will the French boats use non-hull penetrating optical senses instead of traditional periscopes?

Considering that Thales is a French company it would be nice yes...

Be serious...

[BKNO]

A little bit of home work...

What is important to take into consideration with the Barracuda program is the technologic aspect of it.

During hard yearly negotiations with the industry, the last of which took place in 2006, DGA made clear to the that they wanted a significant technologic gains.

With these SSNs, better value for money was requiered, not only "Off the shelf" from the previous generation, this caused the 3 years program delays and the prolonged feasability studies during which a few configuration were proposed.

The goal was (openly) to avoid the problems encoutered by the Rafale program which systems obsolescence dues to lenghtly developement time were causing a substantial increase in cost.

So while some existing system architectures are retained because they are relatively new, at their heart it's all going to be the latest newbies.

According to the document ASSEMBLÉE NATIONALE N° 2627, PROJET DE loi de finances pour 2001 (n° 2585) from 11 october 2000, Barracuda then known as "programme de sous-marin d'attaque futur" (SMAF) have seen a heavy feasability studies revision with contract originaly scheduled for 2003 and service delivery 2010 then 2012.

A NAVAL version of the SCALP was also perceived as a necessary capabiltiy, it is now classified as MdCN (missile de croisiere naval) dy DGA.

>>>>>

Reactor and Propulsion.

The reactor is of the K15 family but NOT that used by the TRIOMPHANT class or CdG.

Weither the Astute uses a SSBN reactor (a Vanguard-class Core-H PWR 2), Barracuda reactor is of a new design, sized for its hull, using more advanced technologies than the previous generation of K15 equiping French SNLE-NGs.

Developement of the K15 family dates from <> 1986, this new reactor was only developed from 2003 onward.

The contract for the Barracuda reactor was passed by DGA to AREVA TA and DCN in December 2006, for an adaptation of the K15 equiping the SNLE-NGs and CDG.

A technology demonstrator have been runing for <> a year in a new-built (from 2003) facilities.

It was not designed for a 30 years life unrefueld autonomy, instead, it is conceived for the use of the SAME grade of fuel than the EDF (CIVILIAN) reactors, and is in compliance with the latest safety and environmental regulations (MARPOL), it still have been designed with an autonomy of ten years in mind.

Autonomy, maintainance, quieting and new "Supercruise" design were among the requierements, and the first operational reactor is scheduled for start in 2014.

The propulsive system is of a new, "hybrid type":

Optimised for higher silent speeds, using a combined electric, a turbo-electric layout and pump jet.

Advantages are obvious, simpler design, higher power output for a lower energy consumption, significant reduction of the system total mass.

>>>>>

Hull and hydrodynamics.

Considering its futur role and MN mission requierements, barracuda design phylosophy is similar to that of the USN Virginia class, with clear demands on shallow waters operations capabilties from the outset including special ops.

Note that the latest isn't necessarly reflected in the hull design of Astute for example, which basic design is that of the Trafalgar class with an enlarged hull to accomodate the larger reactor.

There was no requierements for a higher maneuvrability which was one of the Virginia class and is part of that of Barracuda.

This is reflected in its design, in particular the X-shaped control surfaces similar to that fited to the Sweedish A-19 class and providing with increased control authority, DCN proposed configuration ressembles that of the Virginia.
http://img516.imageshack.us/img516/156/shipssnbarracudacutawayqj1.jpg
It will be equiped with a non-penetrating optronics periscopes designed by Thales/Sagem.

>>>>>

Weapon and combat systems.

Barracuda is designed around a requierement for 75 days of autonomy.

Weapon load is sized for this mission length, and as DoC_FouALieR have already established it posses four torpedo tubes and will carry a total of 20 weapons.
All weapons including those aimed at ground targets will be tube-launched.

The Combat Management System is derivated from the SYCOBS, which was originaly developed in replacement of the SNLE-NG SET system.
http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/8997/subticsve8.jpg
This upgrade was made necessary by the introdution of the new M 51 SLBMs.

SET was fited to all MN SNLE-NGs and only the S619 LE TERRIBLE will be equiped with SYCOBS from launch, it will be retrofited to the remaining boats later.

Barracuda Combat Management System will be sharing SYCOBS architecure and also have much in common with DCN (Scoprene) Subtics CMS.

Barracuda sonars will be bow, flank and towed arrays.

Communication includes: Link-16, Link 22, SATCOM (SYRACUSE II).

Internal communication is by Optical-fibre transmission.

About the weapon load:

France have long been an advocate of multirole assets and high degree of flexibility.

Barracuda is regarded as the "Omnirole" submarine.

If it isn't equiped with vertical launchers, its weapon capabilties are no lesser, for example, although perhaps not as capable as a SCALP NAVAL, the new generation Exocet (and sub-launched versions) MM40 Block3 have a 180 km range and ground target capabilties.

Vertical launchers were disregarded as being too costly and heavy and as weapon capabilties increased with new modes the need for this arrangement was quiet low.

A submarine-launched version of MBDA-France MICA is also proposed and was displayed on MBDA stand at Eurosatory a couple of years ago...

DoC_FouALieR Personnaly I think we could evolve.

I desagree here, remember that France have the FULL capabiltity to design, build (and sell for the last type) SSBN, SSN and SSK from A-to-Z, even the French industrials want to retain this capability.

[DoC_FouALieR]

Talking about evolution, I was rather thinking at surface platform radars and land assets such as IFVs, among others.
But I totally agree on building our own SSNs.

[riksavage]

Excuse me for my naiveté but the two previous posts here appear to leverage on the Barracudas size being driven by Mediterranean focused operations not financial restrictions.

I somehow doubt UK and US boats are going to suffer a significant disadvantage operating in the Med because they happen to be larger. The significant increase in weapons payload the UK/US boats will carry, far out ways the Barracudas smaller size and ‘so called’ littoral advantages. In today’s unpredictable world you need a SSN system with global reach, one that can stay at sea for extended periods, have the capability to monitor hostile countries for extended periods of time, carry and deploy SF water operators and finally launch precession strike missions. Looking at Astute vs, Barracuda I know which one I would opt for – size does matter!

Just because Thales is building elements of the UK non-penetrating periscopes doest automatically mean the French boats will opt for a similar design, I simply asked the question will they or won’t they?

[DoC_FouALieR]

As I said, the smaller sized of the Barracuda is lead by financial restriction.

However small size doesn't mean less capabilities. In the case of the Barracuda, it only affects the number of weapons.
In today’s unpredictable world you need a SSN system with global reach, one that can stay at sea for extended periods, have the capability to monitor hostile countries for extended periods of time, carry and deploy SF water operators and finally launch precession strike missions.
This is typically what we expect from a SSN like the Barracuda, the programm is build around what you have described, plus the fact that it has to fit a small boat, involving new reactor and prop technologies mainly.

Concerning the Med sea, it is not that shallow to require mini-subs. Not as shallow as the Atlantic shore of France...

Just because Thales is building elements of the UK non-penetrating periscopes doest automatically mean the French boats will opt for a similar design, I simply asked the question will they or won’t they?
They will.

[BKNO]

riksavage I somehow doubt UK and US boats are going to suffer a significant disadvantage operating in the Med because they happen to be larger.

Well you should.

The Trafalgar class was notoriously unmaneuvrable and the Astute class offers no improvements in this field only an increase in weight.

In seas like these, smaller, more agile subs have a clear advantage.

For a sub to be operating in shallow waters, maneuvrability is a MOST, even our actual SSNs are hitting the bottom from time to time and it can be even more of an issue with heavier/less maneuvrable subs.

Astute like Trafalgars before them are designs which were optimised for blue water operations and Russian boomers hunting, now look at the latest Virginia class and tell me what the difference is with the Seawolf....

Your assumption that bigger is better rests on what exactly?

riksavage Just because Thales is building elements of the UK non-penetrating periscopes doest automatically mean the French boats will opt for a similar design, I simply asked the question will they or won’t they?

What it means is that Thales have developed the technology and that it IS available to DGA so YES it means automatically ported to Franch futur boats/SSNs.

riksavage In today’s unpredictable world you need a SSN system with global reach,

Sure added with the best propulsion, combat systems, communication system and electronic available.

If you care to compare the two, it become more than obvious that Astute will be well behind when Barracuda enters service.

Are you implying that Astute which is basically 15 years older and already needs upgrades for cause of systems obsolescence is going to be as effiscient than a sub which is still designed today???

Havre a look at the 1999 to 2006 NAO on Astute and you will have a proper idea of what it is, been years late in service entry doesn't make it as moderns a system even as a Scoprene class...

What you are talking about had little to do with effisciency it have to do with combat persistance and is a different matter.

You can get sunk with 10 weapons more onboard or survive/conduct your mission with 10 less, what matter is what you can do and that you be able to do it for the requiered period of time and MN requierements were for 70 days.

DoC_FouALieR As I said, the smaller sized of the Barracuda is lead by financial restriction.

Every single French/DGA program is linked to the ratio weight/cost.

[riksavage]

BKNO The Virginia Class new attack submarine was designed to be an advanced stealth multi-mission nuclear-powered submarine for deep ocean anti-submarine warfare and littoral (shallow water) operations.
Dimensions
Length 377ft
Beam 34ft
Displacement, Submerged 7,800t

The Astute Class dimensions are almost identical, so one would assume it would have a similar footprint in a littoral environment, so therefore as in the case of the Virginia class suitable for littoral operations.
Length 97m
Beam 10.4m
Displacement 7,800t


Please provide me with evidence of Astute's obsolescence?

I would place bets on the Barracudas NOT being built on time. So called new-technological claims by France will ultimately lead to teething problems.

[BKNO]

riksavage The Astute Class dimensions are almost identical, so one would assume it would have a similar footprint in a littoral environment, so therefore as in the case of the Virginia class suitable for littoral operations.

It have little to DO with size ONLY, but SIZE and Hydrodynamics.

As for Astute problems of obsolescence, try the UK NAO as i said it's FULL of pretty good and proper informations.

And instead of copynig/pasting datas you'd better start with the program politico-industrial history.

riksavage I would place bets on the Barracudas NOT being built on time. So called new-technological claims by France will ultimately lead to teething problems.

What matters here is that every single device inside it will be of a totally NEW generation weither that of Astute is already dated.

http://img350.imageshack.us/img350/1452/1999naoastute1yt8.jpg

http://img277.imageshack.us/img277/2509/haharire395xk1.gif

http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/4508/astuteorigins1aq6.jpg

http://img68.imageshack.us/img68/893/2076suite1996yx3.jpg

http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/674/1999naoastute2fu8.jpg

2076 is NOW sorted by Thales but was supposed to be ready MORE than 5 years ago...

To summerise it is NO more modern than our latest SNLE and their radar suite (among other items) already needs upgrading due to delays in their service entry and developements....

http://www.thalesgroup.com/press/press_releases/1_10065_236_12662.html

Thales awarded contract for major submarine sonar upgrade

Bristol, 28 Sep 2006

Thales UK has been awarded the contract worth some £30M for a major enhancement to the Trafalgar and Astute Class submarine sonar suites. Designated the Sonar 2076 Stage 5 programme,



AGAIN you seems to keep implying that no technological progresses are made in France and that the UKs are so much more advanced that they managed to launch a program a full two (electronic) generation cycles ago and still will have as advance systems in their Astues as they will be in a SSN shich is still on the design board..

READ: Delays
The Astute class was expected to be built roughly one-fifth more quickly than earlier boats, with lower running costs and a much smaller ship’s company. In the event however the programme has slipped by 4 years and has a predicted cost overrun of £1 billion,[1] and required a U.S. engineering management team from General Dynamics Electric Boat to be brought in to resolve programme problems.[2] The UK House of Commons Defence Committee, in July 2004, estimated the cost of Astute as £3,498 million compared to £2,578 million approved at Main Gate.[3] Furthermore they noted that the predicted in-service date was January 2009 compared to the date of June 2005 approved at Main Gate. A £164 million cost increase was disclosed in a National Audit Office report in November 2006. However the NAO noted the in-service date was then ahead of schedule compared to the revised in-service date.[4]

>>>>>

SSN Astute Class Attack Submarine, United Kingdom

PROPULSION

The nuclear power will be provided by the Rolls-Royce PWR 2 pressurised water reactor. The long-life core fitted on the PWR 2 means that refuelling will not be necessary in the service life of the submarine.

http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/astute/
>>>>>

SSBN Triomphant Class Ballistic Missile Submarines, France.

PROPULSION

The submarine's propulsion system is a nuclear turbo-electric system based on a Type K15 Pressure Water Reactor (PWR) supplying 150MW. The auxiliary propulsion system is diesel electric, with two SEMT-Pielstick 8 PA 4 v 200 SM diesels.

http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/triomphant/

>>>>>

Barracuda le programme dirigé par le CEA/DDPN de construction sur le site de Cadarache d'un réacteur d'essais à terre de chaufferies nucléaires (RES), dans lequel un coeur représentatif du coeur du Barracuda devra être testé.

http://www.defense.gouv.fr/dga/enjeux_defense/les_programmes_d_armement/systemes_de_forces/maitrise_du_milieu_aeromaritime/sous_marin_

IN REALITY: The DEMONSTRATOR for the TRIOMPHANT reactor was STILL in trial while HMS Vanguard, was commissioned (in 1993), its reactor being of an older technological generation than that of the Triomphant...

The first PWR2 reactor was completed in 1985 with testing beginning in August 1987 at the Vulcan Naval Reactor Test Establishment, CORE H is only a recently developed core for the PWR 2 and the SAME reactor is fited to BOTH Vanguard and Astute.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolls-Royce_PWR#PWR2

http://img479.imageshack.us/img479/3951/houseofcommon20june06bf4.jpg

Source: House of commons Defense commitee 20 June 2006.

The FIRST K15 wasn't instaled on-board le Triomphant before 1996....
http://www.technicatome.com/taweb.php?lg=fr&pos=0&vers=fl

Barracuda definitive reactor isn't even fully designed YET only a demonstrator is in CONSTRUCTION as for December 2006 = réacteur d'essais RES.

Date: 22 décembre 2006.

" La nouvelle chaufferie présentera de nets progrès en matière d'autonomie de fonctionnement et de maintenance. Pour la mettre au point, AREVA TA s'appuiera sur le réacteur d'essais RES, en cours de construction à Cadarache."

"Le démarrage de la première chaufferie nucléaire embarquée est prévu pour 2014."
http://www.arevagroup.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=arevagroup_fr/PressRelease/PressReleaseFullTemplate&cid=1164911661378
As for Dec 2006, Barracuda reactor demonstrator IS of the same TYPE than the K-15 but of an entirely NEW design, MORE compact as Barracuda dimentions are smaler than that of Triomphant and the FIST serie Barracuda reactor is not even scheduled to be STARTED before 2014.

To summerise: Barracuda is of an entirely NEW generation of propulsion, Hydrodynamics, and systems weither Astute is derivated from Trafalgar and Vanguards for its design, reactor, propulsion systems, and systems...

[Falstaff]

Now hold on a second...

1. Although little is known about the Barracuda from first drawings it appears to have a more modern shape than the Astute class subs, it shares some hydrodynamical features with recent submarines like the German U-212A class. I'm not so sure about it being more useful in littoral waters though.
Although an X-rudder is more suitable for shallow waters (lower draft) it seems the Barracuda doesn't have bow or sail rudders which provide very good depth steering capabilities. The Astute has a bow rudder, so I guess in terms of shallow water operations, I can't see any advantage for the Barracuda class. Or will it have retractable rudders?

2. Size does matter... at least if you need room for noise reduction measures. I'm very surprised about the French engineers' braveness as rumours go the Rubis resembles a submerged fleet oiler in terms of noise profile. Some of these noise reduction measures are very bulky and it remains to be seen if a 85m vessel is big enough, even if the new reactor is very small.
BTW, I think the Brits did wise with designing the Astute with a big weapon load. When involved in a land strike operation you'd be rather pissed if you ran out of ammo too soon...

3. We all know about the difficulties the Brits had with their program and their engineering gap. The French did better bridging the time between two designs with e.g. messing with us in the SSK export market. However, I reckon they (the Brits) solved these issues and the Astutes will be doing their jobs very well.
And I'd place a very high bet that the Barracuda program will have delays and will have cost overruns. That's just the way it goes with such complex programs.
In the end we'll have two very capable European SSNs, and that's great!

4. The 2076 type sonar is by far the best sonar suite that's in the water today. It's remains to be seen if the Barracuda really will be a generation ahead in that respect. I dare doubt it, sorry.

5. In my world if you have a reactor that doesn't need to be refuelled during lifetime that's a plus.

[BKNO]

Falstaff Although an X-rudder is more suitable for shallow waters (lower draft) it seems the Barracuda doesn't have bow or sail rudders which provide very good depth steering capabilities. The Astute has a bow rudder, so I guess in terms of shallow water operations, I can't see any advantage for the Barracuda class. Or will it have retractable rudders?

X-rudders allow for a much tigghter turning radius according to DCN.

Astute is a heavier version of a sub which design was optimised for Blue waters ops and reputably unmaneuvrable.

Falstaff Size does matter... at least if you need room for noise reduction measures.

That's WHY Barracuda reactor have been redesigned.

Falstaff I'm very surprised about the French engineers' braveness as rumours go the Rubis resembles a submerged fleet oiler in terms of noise profile.

http://www.netmarine.net/bat/smarins/amethyst/caracter.htm

Améthyste solved the problems long ago, the curent generation of SNLEs are among the deepest diving (below 500 m) and quietest inthe world, according to Jane's they have a noise radiation lowert than that of the seabed.

Falstaff Some of these noise reduction measures are very bulky and it remains to be seen if a 85m vessel is big enough,

You really should update your infos as for France's technologic capabilties.

As i said, the actual SNLEs are among the quietest in the wrold more to the point they are built in 100 HLES grade steel, even the US havent managed this so far.

Falstaff even if the new reactor is very small.

As opposed to Astute Barracuda reactor will be sized accordingly, NOT a straight version of the K15.

Falstaff BTW, I think the Brits did wise with designing the Astute with a big weapon load. When involved in a land strike operation you'd be rather pissed if you ran out of ammo too soon...

There are more than one issue with strike launched from submarines, expecially when your comms arent up to it....

Falstaff The French did better bridging the time between two designs with e.g. messing with us in the SSK export market.

They did better with the SNLEs and now with the new generation SSKs.

Falstaff 2. However, I reckon they (the Brits) solved these issues and the Astutes will be doing their jobs very well.

Electric Boat did that for them, they still have a gap in capabilties due to the problem they already had with the low number of qualified designers, engineers, technicians...

France have long put the money where it was needed hence a high level of capabilty and THREE different Submarine types in its catalog...

Falstaff And I'd place a very high bet that the Barracuda program will have delays and will have cost overruns. That's just the way it goes with such complex programs.
In the end we'll have two very capable European SSNs, and that's great!

France is NOT Britain and DGA NOT MoD to start with then again it is still a possiblity.

Falstaff 2. 4. The 2076 type sonar is by far the best sonar suite that's in the water today. It's remains to be seen if the Barracuda really will be a generation ahead in that respect. I dare doubt it, sorry.

I thin you keep ignoring FACTS, technologies is p[rogressing FORWARD.

Thales doesnt wait for MoD to get their acts together and make technologic progresses the best sonar they have is the last they developed...

Falstaff 5. In my world if you have a reactor that doesn't need to be refuelled during lifetime that's a plus.

Using a UNIQUE grade of fuel is a lot more cost effiscient for France as there is NO MORE need for a military grade.

As for Astute and Barracuda systems...

Sonar suites:

Astute = Contract 2076 previous to 1996:

Upgrade = Inboard processing equipment Oct 2006.

Barracuda = Thales UMS 3000 contract at Euronaval 2006.

Combat system:

Astute = Integrated Tactical Weapon system (TWS) contract 1996.

Barracuda = SYCOBS derivated from that developed for the SNLE No4 S619 (LE TERRIBLE) contracted 28 juillet 2000, system still in developement from 2006.

Communications:

Astute = Link 16.

Barracuda = Link 16, Link 21, SATCOM (Syracuse 3).

So to summerise:

Astute comms and systems, TWS/Sonar 2076 are dated from <> two technology generations previous to Barracuda feasability contracts passed by DGA.

Systems architectures rests on a technology developed by the SAME manufacturer when it was still called GEC Marconi and are COMMON with the Updated Trafalgar class.

"Designated the Sonar 2076 Stage 5 programme, this upgrade will replace the existing inboard processing equipment with an open architecture COTS based processing system."

I hardly SEE WHY the British MoD would waste £30M for system if it wasn't needed, more to it, weither UMS 3000 is totally new, 2076 is at its fifth stage of developement.

As for its reactor it IS of a technology contemporrary of that of the S 616 LE TRIOMPHANT class of 1989 weither that of Barracuda is still on still its demonstrator form.

Now you're more than welcome to explain to US how systems developed ten years appart by the same company are going to be equivalent in performances and growth potential...

[Falstaff]

X-rudders allow for a much tigghter turning radius according to DCN.

Astute is a heavier version of a sub which design was optimised for Blue waters ops and reputably unmaneuvrable.


That's true and one reason why they've become more common recently. Another really is that they have lower draft. Still, if you want to go into real shallow waters the most important thing is depth steering and that's were a bow or sail rudder is still favourable over a clean bow or sail.




Améthyste solved the problems long ago, the curent generation of SNLEs are among the deepest diving (below 500 m) and quietest inthe world, according to Jane's they have a noise radiation lowert than that of the seabed.


I'm very well aware of the fact that they were upgraded and they were heavily in need for upgrade. Still I reckon that the Rubis subs are too small to employ everything you need for a truely silent submarine.
BTW do you know why the Soviets for example built some of the deepest diving submarines?They did it for a reason and it has to do with noise...



Electric Boat did that for them, they still have a gap in capabilties due to the problem they already had with the low number of qualified designers, engineers, technicians...


As I said we all know about these difficulties. I'm pretty sure however that Britain will deal with it accordingly.
The big question is if countries like France and Britain will be able to afford an industrial base for building nuclear submarines in the future. The financial burdens are evident.
Perhaps this is the last generation of SSNs built by France and Britain alone.


I thin you keep ignoring FACTS, technologies is p[rogressing FORWARD.

Thales doesnt wait for MoD to get their acts together and make technologic progresses the best sonar they have is the last they developed...


Mmh, you seem to assume that a later developed piece is automatically better than the earlier one? I don't know. 2076 sets a very high mark. We'll see.
BTW I rather don't think there will be a direct technology transfer between these two programs. The MoD would be very pissed if so and the DGA vice versa.
In a few years we'll see what the development programs come up with and how it all works out.
And in addition I'm pretty sure the Astutes have an approbriate growth margin built in and will be upgraded accordingly through the years. There's enough room for it :D



Now you're more than welcome to explain to US how systems developed ten years appart by the same company are going to be equivalent in performances and growth potential...

No, I'm not going to. As I said, we'll have to see what happens. And if you read my previous post carefully I only said "I dare doubt it".

[BKNO]

Falstaff That's true and one reason why they've become more common recently. Another really is that they have lower draft. Still, if you want to go into real shallow waters the most important thing is depth steering and that's were a bow or sail rudder is still favourable over a clean bow or sail.

Thats only theorical, ballast are used to balance subs and whatever way you turn it, Trafalgar design is one of the less maneuvrable, Astute being heavier and bulkier can hardly do better......

Falstaff Still I reckon that the Rubis subs are too small to employ everything you need for a truely silent submarine....

They SOLVED the problems didn't they???

Falstaff I'm pretty sure however that Britain will deal with it accordingly.

They have to restructure they whole shipbuilding industry... France doesnt.

Falstaff The big question is if countries like France and Britain will be able to afford an industrial base for building nuclear submarines in the future.

You keep mystaking DGA for MoD. DGA finances have been positive for YEARSD thanks to M.A.M. There is a large diference and France CAN afford its programmes on this basis only.

Falstaff Mmh, you seem to assume that a later developed piece is automatically better than the earlier one? I don't know. 2076 sets a very high mark. We'll see.

There is TEN years of difference between the two.

Falstaff BTW I rather don't think there will be a direct technology transfer between these two programs. The MoD would be very pissed if so and the DGA vice versa.

Design belong to the cunstomers, technologies belong to Thales, they have a common technology database pool for all their bramnches and it is NOT about technology transfert it is about technology cycles.

Falstaff In a few years we'll see what the development programs come up with and how it all works out.
And in addition I'm pretty sure the Astutes have an approbriate growth margin built in and will be upgraded accordingly through the years. There's enough room for it

You seems to sort of wich some problems in the Barracuda programme....

As for the upgrade potential, you didnt properly READ Thales stament on the sonar, there is NONE possible as a simple plud-and-play soplution.

They had to REPLACE the whole inboard processing equipment because Astute systems architectures are based upon a technology dated from TWO generations 1996 compared to 2006...

[QUOTE] Falstaff No, I'm not going to. As I said, we'll have to see what happens. And if you read my previous post carefully I only said "I dare doubt it". [ /QUOTE]

Well you wont but you also can't, you only can have doubts in front of reality, that's the whole point.

[Falstaff]

Thats only theorical, ballast are used to balance subs and whatever way you turn it, Trafalgar design is one of the less maneuvrable, Astute being heavier and bulkier can hardly do better......


No, if you have a certain (rather low) speed you use the rudders. And although a clean bow is favourable for low noise emissions and sonar performance for depth steering an additional set of rudders is a good idea.
The U-212A class uses an X-rudder as well as a sail rudder, that's because one of the requirements was that it must be able to sail submerged in waters as shallow as 17 metres. That's the same requirement as for the 500 ton U-206 class, it is based on requirements for operations in the Baltic Sea and needs superb depth steering characteristics.
Once again, the Barracuda might have retractable rudders. Do you know if there are any?


You keep mystaking DGA for MoD. DGA finances have been positive for YEARSD thanks to M.A.M. There is a large diference and France CAN afford its programmes on this basis only.


Even if it's true that the DGA is more efficient than the MoD you can't deny France has the same budget problems all western European countries have to face at the moment. See Rafale procurement for example. Building SSNs is very expensive and so my question is a just one, I think.


Design belong to the cunstomers, technologies belong to Thales, they have a common technology database pool for all their bramnches and it is NOT about technology transfert it is about technology cycles.


You're assuming they're inventing the wheel each time?
At my unniversity there was the same research project for two different turbofan suppliers at the same institute at the same time. They build a wall right in the middle of the hall and the engineers were forbidden to speak to each other :rolleyes:



You seems to sort of wich some problems in the Barracuda programme....


Je suis desolé mais je ne comprends pas ca...


As for the upgrade potential, you didnt properly READ Thales stament on the sonar, there is NONE possible as a simple plud-and-play soplution.

They had to REPLACE the whole inboard processing equipment because Astute systems architectures are based upon a technology dated from TWO generations 1996 compared to 2006...


Yes ok, but that doesn't mean it can't be upgraded, it means it's more difficult and probably more expensive. But it can be done and they will do it.



Well you wont but you also can't, you only can have doubts in front of reality, that's the whole point.

I have doubts and you're assuming and in the end we'll both see what's the outcome.

[BKNO]

Once again, the Barracuda might have retractable rudders. Do you know if there are any?

NOPE i dont but i know Astute is derivated form a design which doesnt have a high degree of maneuvrability.

Even if it's true that the DGA is more efficient than the MoD you can't deny France has the same budget problems all western European countries have to face at the moment.QUOTE]

Well is suggets you inform yourself on the subject.

AGAIN for the past three/four years DGA finances are CLEAN.

Budget increased for the third year in a row.

[QUOTE] Falstaff See Rafale procurement for example. Building SSNs is very expensive and so my question is a just one, I think.

Bad example, Rafale developement is FAR more advanced than that of Typhoon.
Falstaff You're assuming they're inventing the wheel each time?

Not assuming, i KNOW what technologies cycles means, they mean results of years of R&D, they mean the difference between pantium II and Pantium III, they mean an increase in computing power of <> X 50 etc.

Falstaff At my unniversity there was the same research project for two different turbofan suppliers at the same institute at the same time. They build a wall right in the middle of the hall and the engineers were forbidden to speak to each other

Well my brother at SNECMA will be happy to lean how you guys are working...

Falstaff Je suis desolé mais je ne comprends pas ca...

You keep writing time and again that you expect problems with this programme, WHY???

Falstaff Yes ok, but that doesn't mean it can't be upgraded, it means it's more difficult and probably more expensive. But it can be done and they will do it.

What it means is that the UK MoD will have to pay a lot for systems upgrades and that there is NO certainty the combat system and comms are going to be upgraded any time soon.

RN Chief of staff requioers new comm levels like link 22 for example for the simple reason that it is a real pain to planify a combine land strike between SSNs and the rest of a coalition force.

Check the level of comms of Barracuda and see for yourself, it is already SATCOM capable.

So the probability of upgrades vs cost is highwer in the future for the Barracuda simply because Astute cost have risen and its service entry sliped significantly.

Falstaff I have doubts and you're assuming and in the end we'll both see what's the outcome.

I'm making NO assumptions, I only look at facts as they are.

[Falstaff]

Well is suggets you inform yourself on the subject.

AGAIN for the past three/four years DGA finances are CLEAN.

Budget increased for the third year in a row.

Bad example, Rafale developement is FAR more advanced than that of Typhoon.


I said procurement, not development. And this, my friend, you can't deny.


Not assuming, i KNOW what technologies cycles means, they mean results of years of R&D, they mean the difference between pantium II and Pantium III, they mean an increase in computing power of <> X 50 etc.


I think that's not a good comparison as in sonar technology we've reached a point where development becomes evolutionary, not revolutionary. And as I said, the 2076 sonar suite is a superb one even apart from the usual MoD/DGA/BmVg-press releases.


Well my brother at SNECMA will be happy to lean how you guys are working...


I'm sure they're working on the sealing problem between blades and housing as well ;)


You keep writing time and again that you expect problems with this programme, WHY???


That has nothing to do with the DGA or French programs specifically, I just reckon that every major defense program suffers from delays and cost overruns. These programs are more and more complex and most companies don't perform complexity management too well. And then come the politicians and mess the whole thing up again. And in the meantime there is a new generation of this and that which you have to build in. And then costs rise. And so on and so on and so on.


What it means is that the UK MoD will have to pay a lot for systems upgrades and that there is NO certainty the combat system and comms are going to be upgraded any time soon.

RN Chief of staff requioers new comm levels like link 22 for example for the simple reason that it is a real pain to planify a combine land strike between SSNs and the rest of a coalition force.

Check the level of comms of Barracuda and see for yourself, it is already SATCOM capable.

So the probability of upgrades vs cost is highwer in the future for the Barracuda simply because Astute cost have risen and its service entry sliped significantly.


Exactly my point. However, when funding is available, it will be done.


I'm making NO assumptions, I only look at facts as they are.

You look at facts of things that aren't in existence yet. And so you're assuming ;)

[contedicavour]

Regarding the financial aspect of the Barracuda programme, so far the government has financed a 1st batch of 1 SSN, while leaving options open for a total of 6 ships.
Since it is now sure that a 2nd carrier will be built, it will be very interesting to see the order of priorities in the French Navy's procurement budget between the carrier, the SSNs, the FREMMs (17 in theory...), the last SSBN and the Rafales and NH90s.
I'm sceptical about the possibility of building all 17 FREMM and 6 Barracuda.

cheers

[DoC_FouALieR]

Well, now it depends on the policy of our new president ...

[contedicavour]

Well, now it depends on the policy of our new president ...

Yes. In theory he is much more favourable to defence spending. However he also wishes to increase several items related to social spending and reduce taxes as well. If you add in the fact that the French economy isn't increasing that fast lately and the fact that most defence programmes go over-budget...

What I would find mostly interesting is the order of priority President Sarkozy (or his defence minister) will create within naval programmes. I would expect the high visibility items such as the new carrier to be top priority (also because of their symbolic value). Lower visibility programmes such as the later batches of FREMM or Barracuda may suffer as a consequence.

cheers

[swerve]

Yes. In theory he is much more favourable to defence spending. However he also wishes to increase several items related to social spending and reduce taxes as well. If you add in the fact that the French economy isn't increasing that fast lately and the fact that most defence programmes go over-budget......

cheers

Except that like most EU countries (even including Italy ;) ), the economy & tax revenues have picked up in the last year or so.

[contedicavour]

Except that like most EU countries (even including Italy ;) ), the economy & tax revenues have picked up in the last year or so.

Yes luckily enough :) though there is a long list of priorities to fund before defence programmes... starting with debt reduction btw (especially for Italy).

cheers

[Falstaff]

I'd like to get into a few details:

1) What kind of torpedo will the Barracuda use? We've been told it will not be the WASS Black Shark.

2) Will the Barracuda be an all electric boat?

3) Are there any good sources to get to know more about the pump jet propulsion system?

[DoC_FouALieR]

1) What kind of torpedo will the Barracuda use? We've been told it will not be the WASS Black Shark.
I have strong reasons to say that it will not be the Black Shark. The new torpedo is not even designed. Remember that the Barracuda is to enter service at best in 2014, so I think that the development of the new HW torpedo is to begin around 2008-2009, undoubtely using improved technologies of the BlackShark.

2) Will the Barracuda be an all electric boat?
I'm not sure, but it will not. The shaft is going to be powered by a steam turbine, similar to that employed in Le Triomphant class.

3) for Pumpjet I duno...

[contedicavour]

France would do a good deal to replace F17P torpedoes with Black Shark right now... waiting for 2014 to replace them is a serious handicap.

cheers

[Falstaff]

I agree. That would be a further minimum 7 years with an aging torpedo while a co-developed modern one is available.

[BKNO]

@DoC_FouALieR

Propulsion will be of the Hybrid type, designed for high "Silent" cruising speeds...


The main mission of Barracuda nuclear-powered attack submarine (SSN) being subsurface warfare, the design will combine a high 'acorstic speed' with excellent agility and discretion.

http://www.dcn.fr/us/offre/sous-marins/barracuda.html

§ augmentation de la vitesse maximale silencieuse : discrétion acoustique et performances en détection sous la mer supérieures ;

http://www.defense.gouv.fr/marine/base/dossiers/dossier_du_futur_sous_marin_nucleaire_d_attaque_ba rracuda/les_plus_du_sna_barracuda


§ la torpille lourde future, de maîtrise d'ouvrage devant être exercée ultérieurement par DSA/SPN (service des programmes navals de la DGA)

http://www.defense.gouv.fr/dga/enjeux_defense/les_programmes_d_armement/systemes_de_forces/maitrise_du_milieu_aeromaritime/sous_marin_barracuda/les_sous_marins_barracuda

[Falstaff]

Do you know more about that hybrid propulsion?

I speculated on the electric boat configuration as this would explain the Barracuda's compact size. And it definitely is the future of nuclear submarine propulsion layout.

Les progrès principaux porteront sur l'augmentation de la vitesse maximale silencieuse du navire et la réduction des effets du bruit hydrodynamique à haute vitesse afin d'accroître la mobilité tactique et d'adapter les performances du Barracuda à l'évolution des menaces.

Very wise ;) That will be a huge step forward compared to the Rubis...

la torpille lourde remplaçant la F17

Any data available yet?

[BKNO]

Falstaff Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 186 Do you know more about that hybrid propulsion?

Both conventional and electric but there are little details other than the goal which is increased "silent" (or stealth as DGA puts it) crusing speed and high level of maneuvrability.

[DoC_FouALieR]

Concerning that hybrid propulsion, I'll do a little bit of research about it...

Concerning the "future torpille lourde", I will not be surprised if lack of founds cancel that programm for instead buying BlackSharks... As it has already been seen with the ANF "Anti navire futur" Supersonic anti-ship missile.

[contedicavour]

Concerning that hybrid propulsion, I'll do a little bit of research about it...

Concerning the "future torpille lourde", I will not be surprised if lack of founds cancel that programm for instead buying BlackSharks... As it has already been seen with the ANF "Anti navire futur" Supersonic anti-ship missile.

Besides, it would make sense to run a country-to-country deal exchanging WASS Blackshark for SCALP Naval ;)

cheers

[DoC_FouALieR]

What I could gathered about propulsion:

-Two turbines combined with alternators to produce the electric power.
-The main engine is electric (I think the will further develop the permanent magnet synchronous electric engine that is currently onboard the Scorpene class)
Very compact, very efficient and very low vibrations/noise.
-Highest speed are reached using a steam turbine along with the main machine to power the shaft.

Emergency propulsion is based on:
-One diesel to produce alternative current to supply the main power network.
-Another diesel to charge the batteries with direct current.
-A direct current engine as a backup propulsion directly fed by the batteries.

[BKNO]

http://img105.imageshack.us/img105/8500/gdadossierdepressekz8.jpg

DoC_FouALieR

This is extracted from a DGA dossier de presse...

[DoC_FouALieR]

This is extracted from a DGA dossier de presse...
Thanks, but actually I already know about these sheets ;-)

[submerged]

RN Chief of staff requioers new comm levels like link 22 for example for the simple reason that it is a real pain to planify a combine land strike between SSNs and the rest of a coalition force.

Check the level of comms of Barracuda and see for yourself, it is already SATCOM capable.


new comms systems come and go and it's not hard to implement most systems on the base of the excisting ones so that's not really a con. I also don't get it why people allways think new is better.. a system that's allready in use is allways better because all the bugs are allready worked out and as far as the UK sonar goes: it's proven to be effective and able to track the most silent subs currently in service (and no, i'm not calling names or sources), ofcourse electronics age fast in current times so also the barracuda electronics will allready be ageing the time they enter service. Sorry to distort the vision of a perfect boat..but no platform is perfect and it takes years to perfect one.

As for size considerations in shallow water conditions: size does matter, wich even the americans found out when doing subtacex in the med :rolleyes:

[BKNO]

submerged new comms systems come and go and it's not hard to implement most systems on the base of the excisting ones so that's not really a con.

The one coming is link 22 and France already have SATCOM capabilties for the rest of the fleet.

submerged I also don't get it why people allways think new is better..

Dunno about where you're from but in France they make progresses.........forward.

submerged As for size considerations in shallow water conditions: size does matter, wich even the americans found out when doing subtacex in the med

Always been a forte of Rubis and all, SSKs with a nuclear reactor...

[submerged]

Dunno about where you're from but in France they make progresses.........forward.


guess u missed the point there, i was just referring to the development cycle, even if progresses are made forward it takes time to finetune them under operational conditions, no system is perfect from the start. There's no need to idiotize me over that, i know damn well what i'm talking about ;)

[BKNO]

submerged guess u missed the point there, i was just referring to the development cycle, even if progresses are made forward it takes time to finetune them under operational conditions, no system is perfect from the start. There's no need to idiotize me over that, i know damn well what i'm talking about

I didnt totally miss it.

Thales have been doing some magnificient work on the previous generation particularly in view of the trouble the original somar was in, as for Barracuda thay also have time todevelop it further, it have already been selected...

[riksavage]

BKNO, I have enjoyed reading your lively defence of the Barracuda, you have certainly attempted to both defend and define its future capability. I however still remain somewhat sceptical, why you may ask? Well: it plans to use untried and tested technology, it’s entirely dependent on French expertise, first steel’s not been cut, and weapons proposed have either not been identified (torpedo) or fired from a sub-surface platform before (SCALP). All this says to me - delay, delay, delay, or worse platforms cancelled due to cost overruns. At the end of the day ‘a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush’ or in this scenario ‘a sub in the water (Astute next month) is worth two on the drawing board!’

Also, a quick question, when was the last time a French sub fired a shot in anger?:nutkick

[contedicavour]

BKNO, I have enjoyed reading your lively defence of the Barracuda, you have certainly attempted to both defend and define its future capability. I however still remain somewhat sceptical, why you may ask? Well: it plans to use untried and tested technology, it’s entirely dependent on French expertise, first steel’s not been cut, and weapons proposed have either not been identified (torpedo) or fired from a sub-surface platform before (SCALP). All this says to me - delay, delay, delay, or worse platforms cancelled due to cost overruns. At the end of the day ‘a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush’ or in this scenario ‘a sub in the water (Astute next month) is worth two on the drawing board!’

Also, a quick question, when was the last time a French sub fired a shot in anger?:nutkick

Well well, when was the last time a British sub fired a shot in anger (leaving aside the shot at the Belgrano which had zero ASW defences or a few Tomahawks during Gulf War 2) ? ;)

I do agree with you however that the programme is exposed to delays and potentially some cuts, though not for the same reasons you mention. I'll explain myself : a lot of the technology comes from the SSBNs and the Scorpenes, which will help. What won't help is that the budget will priorize the 2nd carrier and the SSBNs, so the SSNs and the FREMMs will suffer cuts and delays due to budgetary issues. Btw there are rumours around that FREMM numbers will be cut from 17 to 13.

cheers

[Alpha Epsilon]

Well well, when was the last time a British sub fired a shot in anger (leaving aside the shot at the Belgrano which had zero ASW defences or a few Tomahawks during Gulf War 2) ?

Well British submarines also fired TLAMs during Kosovo and Afghanistan. So the RN SSNs have fired in anger on at least 4 different occasions (Falkland War, Kosovo war, Afghanistan war and Iraq Gulf War II). With the sinking of the Belgrano being iirc the only time a SSN ever sank a major warship in anger.

As for the Barracuda: Yes, nice submarine, a vast improvement over the Rubis, but imo still too small. The small size means that it will have just 20 weapons on board. Compare that to the 38 of the Astute class or 40 of the Virginia and you know what I mean. I also wonder what implications the size has on noise, speed (so far quoted as "> 25kn") and endurance ("just" 70 days). So for me, despite the price difference it has to be the Astute SSN.

[contedicavour]

Well it comes down to costs. Who can afford to build 8 Astutes ?
Oh and it also comes down to optimal size for the Mediterranean/Red Sea/Persian Gulf scenarios, for which (as previously mentioned in this thread) big SSNs are not optimal.
I'd say the Astutes are perfect for the Atlantic Ocean, the Barracudas are best for the Mediterranean.

cheers

[DoC_FouALieR]

Btw there are rumours around that FREMM numbers will be cut from 17 to 13.
Rumours rumours.. From experience we could already considered it'll be 13. But that's still a nice bargain, even if not replacing a worthless A 69 aviso by a Fremm number by number.

For the smaller size of the Barracuda, it is very large compared to Rubis, and require a smaller crew!
To operate an Astute you need almost 100 crewman, and only 60 for the Barracuda, that's cutting down about 30% of space dedicated to crew quarters... and less food and water for same endurance. Plus the fact that propulsion is controlled from ahead of the sub, resulting in more compact installations.
Consequently I don't see why the Barracuda would not be as silent as other modern subs like Astute or Virginia, given the progress that has already been made on Le Triomphant SSBN.

[contedicavour]

Rumours rumours.. From experience we could already considered it'll be 13. But that's still a nice bargain, even if not replacing a worthless A 69 aviso by a Fremm number by number.

.

True, at the end it would mean replacing the 7 Leygues, 2 remaining destroyers of the preceding class, potentially the 2 AAW FFGs and 6 remaining avisos with 13 FREMMs. Still a very good deal.
I wonder if our 2 governments shouldn't join forces on 2 AAW versions of FREMM with active-EMPAR and 32 Sylver A50 VLS for Aster-30.

bonne soirée

[DoC_FouALieR]

I wonder if our 2 governments shouldn't join forces on 2 AAW versions of FREMM with active-EMPAR and 32 Sylver A50 VLS for Aster-30.
Absolutely, as I already said in some talks with navy officer in France, I regret that we do not have reduced the number of Fremm for instead built at least 4 Horizon class AAW ships, because I think we really lack this kind of very capable AAW platform. But if it can be achieved with lower costs 'AAW' Fremms, it would be even better.

[Alpha Epsilon]

To operate an Astute you need almost 100 crewman, and only 60 for the Barracuda, that's cutting down about 30% of space dedicated to crew quarters... and less food and water for same endurance. Plus the fact that propulsion is controlled from ahead of the sub, resulting in more compact installations.

The crew of the Astute class is 98 and that includes "at sea trainees". I think the actual crew number required for operation is 84. That is a reduction by at least 32 compared to the Trafalgar class (with a crew of about 130). The main reasons for the size difference are the larger weapon numbers and the probably (not sure) larger reactor that doesn't need refuelling of the Astute class. And of course the different traditions with British SSNs being traditionally quite a bit larger than French ones.

Consequently I don't see why the Barracuda would not be as silent as other modern subs like Astute or Virginia, given the progress that has already been made on Le Triomphant SSBN.

As said, I do not know, it's just iirc a rough rule that larger submarines have more space for "accoustic insulation".


True, at the end it would mean replacing the 7 Leygues, 2 remaining destroyers of the preceding class, potentially the 2 AAW FFGs and 6 remaining avisos with 13 FREMMs. Still a very good deal.

Well, only if another programme follows. Otherwise the it would mean 13 FREMMS, 5 Lafayettes and 2 Horizons. :( Perhaps they'd buy about 8 largish OPV-types, similiar to what the A69s are.

[Rich]

We have every reason to believe the Barracuda is going to be a very quiet and effective submarine. One of the more interesting Barracuda web sights Ive found. http://www.asd-network.com/editorial_detail.asp?ID=2

[riksavage]

Contedicavour the General Belgrano was escorted by two destroyers, the ARA Piedra Buena (D-29) and the Bouchard (D-26) (both also ex-USN vessels), as Task Group 79.3. They made a vain attempt to use depth charges following the initial attack on the Belgrano before running away. So your comment about lack of ASW support is not entirely correct. Antiquated yes, but at least they had a go!

Agian when was the last time a French sub fired a shot in anger?

[radiosilence]

Agian when was the last time a French sub fired a shot in anger?

PNS Hangor, a Daphne class submarine sank INS Khukri a Type 14 ASW frigate in 1971. Don't recall any other incidents after that.

[riksavage]

I would be interested to know whether, like the UK and US, its normal procedure for a single French SSN to escort the designated nuclear deterrent SSBN when on patrol. If so one would assume that the patrol would be global in scope thus decreasing the likelihood of detection (rather than restrict the patrol to the Med only). If this is the case a true blue water SSN is required, which in my view somewhat mitigates the arguments for smaller boats better suited to operating in the Mediterranean. The escorting SSN must have the same endurance, stores capacity etc., to mirror that of the SSBN unless you plan on switching the escorting SSN half-way through the deployment. This is I believe one of the reasons why the UK/US continue to build large SSN’s.

The 1971 incident was, I assume, during the Indian / Pakistan war, which ultimately resulted in modern Bangladesh?

[Super Nimrod]

Another reason for the Upsizing of the Astute is the decision to end 'hot bunking' so that each matelot has their own bed and doesn't have to share it. Adding accomodation for another 40 odd bunks can't have been easy.

[Alpha Epsilon]

Here a contribution to the debate.

One of the more interesting Barracuda web sights Ive found.

Indeed, one of the best articles I've read on the Barracuda. Here some points that might be interesting.

Still, the defining phase of that class of equipment was officially launched in 1998, its inception in 2002, and the total cost of the program was estimated at b4.5 euros. Initially planned for 2010, the operational implementation will be postponed to 2012, with tests planned in 2008.

This is surprising to me. The contract actually signed is for 8 billion euros and first delivery 2017 iirc.

Technically speaking, the DCN contemplates to produce a ship whose capacity is equivalent to the US Navy Seawolf and Virginia classes, so that the Barracuda should aim for the highest standards in terms of submarine warfare.

Sounds good, and probably achievable in a lot of areas, though how they want to achieve that in the endurance area with the Sea Wolf having 50 weapons and Virginia 40. Also Sea Wolf's and Virignia's endurance at sea should be a lot higher than the 70 days quoted for the Barracuda.

It will be designed to use the experience acquired with the boilers in the Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier and the missile launching submarines of the Triomphant class, so as to minimize costs.

This makes a lot of sense. A bit like the Astute using the Vanguard's recently retrofitted PWR2 Core H.

Nonetheless, the closing down of the Pierrelate nuclear enrichment plant will make it impossible to provide the heavily enriched fuel that would have enabled ships to increase the time periods between the recharging stages of the nuclear core (from 7 to 10 years between each IPER / recharge), thus increasing sea availability.

Well, we now know that they have increased the time from 7 to 10 years even with commercial fuel. Though they have not made a "no refuelling needed" reactor like the ones in Astute and Virginia. If this has anything to do with a lag in technology or in the size of the submarine and thus reactor I don't know.

Still, the Barracuda should move 4 100 tons on the surface and 4 600 tons underwater – and able to dive to more than 350 meters deep. The ships will be able to sail at a maximum speed of 25 knots, which they should use during cruises of 70 days at most.

Tonnage has gone up a bit, to about 5100 tonnes. The maximum speed seems a little slow, though that might be due to classification and in truth it can run near to 30 knots.

Only one loophole remains; is it a temporary one? The SMAF is not rigged with submarine drones, which is liable to place it below the future capacities of the US Navy.

Really? No UUVs? What about Special Forces insertation? These two should imo be a standard requirement for SSNs.

The technology of delayed launching capsules – enabling the SNA to throw a capsule able to launch the missile in its turn at the right moment, thus providing for its escape – makes for an affordable solution.

Nice. Do other countries use something similiar too?

[DoC_FouALieR]

Really? No UUVs? What about Special Forces insertation? These two should imo be a standard requirement for SSNs.
Don't worry, special forces insertion will be one of the main missions for the Barracuda. And UUVs capability too.

[Alpha Epsilon]

Don't worry, special forces insertion will be one of the main missions for the Barracuda. And UUVs capability too.

I thought so. Which UUV (if one has been selected already)? And how many Special Forces? :)

[BKNO]

http://www.asd-network.com/editorial_detail.asp?ID=2

About this doc: It's not totally informed.

If one does a proper research in the official French agencies (DGA/Assemblee Nationale), the gap in capabilties between the TWO SSN types is not even mentioned.

The goal for quiet operations is NOT to surpass the Rubis which have been done easly with the SNLE-NGs but the latest standards.
http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=1609&stc=1&d=1180433101
http://www.defense.gouv.fr/marine/decouverte/presentation/unites/forces_sous_marines/sous_marins_lanceurs_d_engins/le_snle_le_triomphant_s616
The Triomphant class is quieter than the seabed, hardly what one would call noisy and the Barracuda design goal is to achieve a HIGHER silent cruising speed, no less.

[submerged]

The goal for quiet operations is NOT to surpass the Rubis which have been done easly with the SNLE-NGs but the latest standards.

it isn't really hard to be less noisy then a Rubis if u'd ask me.

As for diving depth and speed, they will be classified so they're no point of comparison

For the smaller size of the Barracuda, it is very large compared to Rubis, and require a smaller crew!
To operate an Astute you need almost 100 crewman, and only 60 for the Barracuda, that's cutting down about 30% of space dedicated to crew quarters... and less food and water for same endurance. Plus the fact that propulsion is controlled from ahead of the sub, resulting in more compact installations.
Consequently I don't see why the Barracuda would not be as silent as other modern subs like Astute or Virginia, given the progress that has already been made on Le Triomphant SSBN.

smaller crew doesn't mean larger endurance in all cases tho, if shit hit's the fan it's nice to have a larger crew so u can still man your operational positions while other people are fixing the problems. Also high system automation seems to be an ideal solution but as we all know.. they're also prone for errors, and what happens when that's the case? I sure as hell know i don't want to be bottomed due to some electronics malfunction

[gf0012-aust]

As said, I do not know, it's just iirc a rough rule that larger submarines have more space for "accoustic insulation".


Sorry, size with respect to "acoustic insulation" has got nothing to do with signature management.

There is no such thing as "acoustic insulation" - and signature management is achieved by other means. In current technology applications, only the US, France and Australia have developed that capability. Other nations are still using variations of "design out" management.

btw, I've worked on submarine projects, and am still involved with UDT signature management.

[gf0012-aust]

Don't worry, special forces insertion will be one of the main missions for the Barracuda. And UUVs capability too.

Currently there are over 60 discrete UUV/USV projects underway. I do not recall France having any discrete projects under development - and they certainly do not have any Tango Bravo type solutions in play.

The UUV/USV UDT community is very small - everyone knows what everyone else is doing at a baseline level - and France has not shown anything unique for the last 6 years. They are eager to work with a couple of NATO and associate nations - but they have cetainly not got anything that amounts to a dismount solution.

I'm curious as to where you get your info, as I've been involved in some recent UDT discussions where all of our allies capability has been discussed as we're looking at merging and fast tracking some solutions. France is part of that group.

[BKNO]

gf0012-aust Currently there are over 60 discrete UUV/USV projects underway. I do not recall France having any discrete projects under development - and they certainly do not have any Tango Bravo type solutions in play.

If is were any you'll be the last to know.
http://www.netmarine.net/bat/cm/thetis/actu.htm

But you still can get your informatrions refreshed from this guy.

Frédéric Dabe, chef du département UUV (underwater unmanned vehicle) au groupe d'études sous-marines de l'Atlantique (Gesma) de la DGA,

Janvier - juillet 2002 : Nouveaux matériels en essai
En étroite collaboration avec le groupe d'étude sous-marines de l'Atlantique (GESMA), la Thétis conduit les essais du sonar Klein (relevé de l'environnement guerre des mines, océanographie et hydrographie) et du robot Redermor (UUV : Unmaned Underwater Vehicule, investigation et classification de mines). Un couplage des deux systèmes est prévu par le GESMA).

>>>>>

Après les drones aériens ou terrestres, les drones navals font désormais parler d'eux. Thème central de la journée Science et défense organisé par la délégation générale pour l'armement (DGA) le 19 octobre 2004 à Brest, ces engins sans pilote intéressent aujourd'hui grandement la marine nationale et pourraient faire leur apparition dans les opérations navales à l'horizon 2010-2015.
http://www.defense.gouv.fr/dga/les_drones_se_jettent_a_l_eau

could be tomorrow.


The Swordship is an audacious concept ship to help developers and potential customers think through the integration of new technologies with next-generation surface combatants.

A powerful network-centric warfare (NCW) node and a platform for a range of unmanned air and surface vehicles (generically designated UXVs), the Swordship will feature a powerful combat system and high-performance sensors.

The combat system will be mission-configurable enabling the ship to make a decisive contribution to naval operations and sea-based land strikes. Advanced stealth ensures extreme discretion, not to mention an appreciable 'advantage zone' where the ship can detect but not be detected.


The National Security Swath Ship (NS3) is designed for homeland maritime security missions.

Typically deployed within territorial waters, the NS3 offers extended coverage thanks to its own boat, an onboard helicopter and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs).

As a homeland security vessel, the NS3 is ideal for combating all forms of illegal trafficking, contraband, illegal immigration and terrorism.


The SMX-23 offers a cost-effective solution for navies wishing to set up a submarine force to defend their littoral or to expand an existing conventional submarine force and its homeland defence missions.

The SMX-23 is designed for safe, precise navigation in shallow waters and for missions ranging from special operations to intelligence gathering and mine laying. Powerful sensors and low observables ensure significant operational advantages.

The SMX-23's small size ensures excellent stealth, making it an exceptional lookout.

The state-of-the-art combat system features new-generation weapons, including Black Shark heavyweight torpedoes and SM39 anti-ship missiles, providing ample firepower and a strong deterrent to any enemy threatening the country's coasts.

Features for special operations include a lock-out/lock-in trunk for combat swimmers, electronic warfare and intelligence gathering systems and a mine-laying system.


The SMX 22, presented by DCNS at 2004 Euronaval exhibition, derives from the aircraft carrier concept applied to the submarine world.
SMX-22 combines three submarines into one underwater vessel with a 3700t displacement. It comprises a command unit nicknamed NCW, and 2 operational units nicknamed OPS.
The NCW unit centralises tactical data, exchanges information with the Navy headquarters, sails the OPS units towards the operational theatre, and ensures energy production. It is also the base for the OPS unit crew between two missions. Each OPS submarine, displacing less than 500 t, is fitted with a mission specific modular payload before leaving the harbour. With no energy production facility, the OPS unit is thus extremely silent. After each mission, limited to a few days, the OPS unit goes back to the NCW command unit for battery recharge and crew change.
This flotilla of 3 submarines can operate jointly on the operational theatre. It can carry up to 50 heavyweight weapons (torpedoes, anti-ship or land attack missiles), as well as UUV and special operation forces.
http://www.dcn.fr/us/innovation/concept.html

There is an appearent information GAP out-there...

[gf0012-aust]

There is an appearent information GAP out-there...

Not at all, in fact refer to my last. Let me know when you can dig up something of note - not your atypical nationalistic hubris. DCN (and I have worked on projects involving DCN) have got nothing special except vaporware in train. The last major UDT Conf was in Naples - and nothing came out of France or was discussed amongst participants.

To be frank, Francois is the only Frenchman in here who is remotely aware of French UDT technology - and it won't be via public internet postings used to establish his case.

[BKNO]

gf0012-aust not your atypical nationalistic hubris.

Let me guess, you asked for any discrete projects under development, i give you the link to that known of DCN and you conclude that this is my "atypical nationalistic hubris". Good going. I didnt know i was working for DCN:onfloorl:


gf0012-aust DCN (and I have worked on projects involving DCN) have got nothing special except vaporware in train.

If i want a proper information about it i certainly NOT going to ask you...:onfloorl:

gf0012-aust The last major UDT Conf was in Naples - and nothing came out of France or was discussed amongst participants.

Time to put your money where you keybord is a provide wth some proper evidences, the "i've been told" stuff doesn't do for us anymore...

gf0012-aust To be frank, Francois is the only Frenchman in here who is remotely aware of French UDT technology - and it won't be via public internet postings used to establish his case.

Sure i believe he is into the "Secret Defense" on this particular aspect of it too. :)

Excuse ME but if you want ot be taken seriously you're going to surpass yourself by a factor of ten or so. Thanks for the effort though.:D

[Aussie Digger]

Let me guess, you asked for any discrete projects under development, i give you the link to that known of DCN and you conclude that this is my "atypical nationalistic hubris". Good going. I didnt know i was working for DCN:onfloorl:

Time you broke out an ENGLISH dictionary mate. Nationalistic refers to your NATION.

DCN IS French is it not?




If i want a proper information about it i certainly NOT going to ask you...:onfloorl:



Time to put your money where you keybord is a provide wth some proper evidences, the "i've been told" stuff doesn't do for us anymore...

As you do with your "squadron talk" based evidence on the Rafale threads?

Annoying and absolutely UN-PROVEABLE isn't it?

Excuse ME but if you want ot be taken seriously you're going to surpass yourself by a factor of ten or so. Thanks for the effort though.:D

I suggest you QUICKLY read the Rafale aerodynamics thread if you wish to continue to participate on this site.

[BKNO]

Mod edit:

Bye.

[merocaine]

O well he was entertaining while he lasted......

[DoC_FouALieR]

Currently there are over 60 discrete UUV/USV projects underway. I do not recall France having any discrete projects under development - and they certainly do not have any Tango Bravo type solutions in play.
Perhaps I've not explain myself correctly. A UUV capability is a wish of navy officers for the Barracuda. As long as there will be money, sooner or later a request for such a capability will be issued to industrials. Not necessary DCN...
If it's later, UUVs can be part of a mid-life upgrade of the Barracuda.

[gf0012-aust]

Perhaps I've not explain myself correctly. A UUV capability is a wish of navy officers for the Barracuda. As long as there will be money, sooner or later a request for such a capability will be issued to industrials. Not necessary DCN...
If it's later, UUVs can be part of a mid-life upgrade of the Barracuda.

I agree. I think all of the nuclear sub users will be moving towards some form of UUV/USV development. The future in sub warfare lies in dismounted options - its the best way to start removing some of the limitations in manned subs.

I used DCN as the primary example as they have been involved in such early work already, and they will naturally be part of a process that enhances sub development.

[nero]

Perhaps I've not explain myself correctly. A UUV capability is a wish of navy officers for the Barracuda. As long as there will be money, sooner or later a request for such a capability will be issued to industrials. Not necessary DCN...
If it's later, UUVs can be part of a mid-life upgrade of the Barracuda.



a single USS-texas, which is a virginia-class sub, can takeout both the barracuda, as well as the le-triomphant in one go.

the best way to counter SSBNs is by using something like a SMX-23 coastal submarine


.

[Tasman]

Mod edit:

Bye.

Adieu BKNO. Perhaps now we will get back to a more serious discussion - he did have the effect of driving some of us away from threads we might otherwise have been interested in!

I have been particularly interested in the UUV/USV discussions as it seems from what Gary and others have said that this has the potential to provide a major breakthrough in the capabilities of underwater platforms. Does the future in this area lie with large SSNs acting as underwater 'carriers' of small UUVs or with unmanned subs working as part of a flotilla controlled and co-ordinated from manned boats?

I imagine this technology will find its way into the French SSN program, even if it has to wait for a mid life upgrade as suggested by the Doc.

Cheers

[gf0012-aust]

I have been particularly interested in the UUV/USV discussions as it seems from what Gary and others have said that this has the potential to provide a major breakthrough in the capabilities of underwater platforms. Does the future in this area lie with large SSNs acting as underwater 'carriers' of small UUVs or with unmanned subs working as part of a flotilla controlled and co-ordinated from manned boats?

I imagine this technology will find its way into the French SSN program, even if it has to wait for a mid life upgrade as suggested by the Doc.

Cheers

There is some very very intersting tech under development, and IMV the tipping point is getting closer.

when you consider advances that the french (esp with micro fuel cells), americans, germans and australians have made with fuel cell technology, then the use of long range ROV/UUV/USV's becomes apparent.

I think I've mentioned before that I was shown some USV tech in Hawai'i at a UDT Conf in 2004. at that stage that platform had an 8hs worth of duration. In the space of 18 months, swimout duration had gone to 36 hrs.

Current advances in storage and propulsion have changed that again in recent times.

There are some very serious capabilities under development, and IMO, the nature of sub warfare is about to undergo some significant change. There may always be manned subs, but the tech means that manned subs running dismounts will be the future.

[Transient]

There is some very very intersting tech under development, and IMV the tipping point is getting closer.

when you consider advances that the french (esp with micro fuel cells), americans, germans and australians have made with fuel cell technology, then the use of long range ROV/UUV/USV's becomes apparent.

I think I've mentioned before that I was shown some USV tech in Hawai'i at a UDT Conf in 2004. at that stage that platform had an 8hs worth of duration. In the space of 18 months, swimout duration had gone to 36 hrs.

Current advances in storage and propulsion have changed that again in recent times.

There are some very serious capabilities under development, and IMO, the nature of sub warfare is about to undergo some significant change. There may always be manned subs, but the tech means that manned subs running dismounts will be the future.


Has the advances in undersea comms been commensurate with the advances made in UUV platform capability? Or is the thrust placed towards incorporating as much automation/AI in the UUVs as possible to minimise comms requirement?

[nero]

There is some very very intersting tech under development, and IMV the tipping point is getting closer.

when you consider advances that the french (esp with micro fuel cells), americans, germans and australians have made with fuel cell technology, then the use of long range ROV/UUV/USV's becomes apparent.

I think I've mentioned before that I was shown some USV tech in Hawai'i at a UDT Conf in 2004. at that stage that platform had an 8hs worth of duration. In the space of 18 months, swimout duration had gone to 36 hrs.

Current advances in storage and propulsion have changed that again in recent times.

There are some very serious capabilities under development, and IMO, the nature of sub warfare is about to undergo some significant change. There may always be manned subs, but the tech means that manned subs running dismounts will be the future.



minisubs will rule the seas if u ask me!!

have u seen the SMX-23 concept yet???

the SMX-23 will not dare into deep-waters, but in shallow coastal waters
it is as dangerous as a crocodile!!

with such small subs its much easier to protect one's territorial waters.

as u must know it's easy to lay mines & conduct special operations with a small compact sub than something like a SSBN.


.

[gf0012-aust]

minisubs will rule the seas if u ask me!!

have u seen the SMX-23 concept yet???

the SMX-23 will not dare into deep-waters, but in shallow coastal waters
it is as dangerous as a crocodile!!

small subs have some considerable limitations. any sub employment is going to be defined by employment issues and platform competency.

with such small subs its much easier to protect one's territorial waters.

No its not. Thats why there are solutions such as CBASS


as u must know it's easy to lay mines & conduct special operations with a small compact sub than something like a SSBN.


.


Smaller subs are clearly limited for minelaying.

I suggest that you look at the minelaying capability of a fleet/blue water sub as compared to a green water/littoral.

larger subs are far easier for spec ops as they allow flexibility of the capability and mix of the specwarrie team.

nukes have been running specops for the last 40+ years. as far as the USN is concerned all that experience contributed to mods for the SSGNs.

[gf0012-aust]

Has the advances in undersea comms been commensurate with the advances made in UUV platform capability? Or is the thrust placed towards incorporating as much automation/AI in the UUVs as possible to minimise comms requirement?

Not an easy one to answer as each developing entity has different philosophies about their future platform doctrine.

"wireless" comms has hit some new developments. eg there is some australian tech which is in the proces of being shared with the USN and RN. On the other hand, the current view for RAN is to stay with umbilicals for the near future as we are more interested in preserving bandwidth, An umbilical therefore restricts the USV's absolute range from the parent vessel, but that approach is acceptable for RAN as it fits current tasking and profiles.

The americans on the other hand are keen to see how far our new tech can be used - as their requirement is for long range remote management.

different strokes for different folks.

[DoC_FouALieR]

a single USS-texas, which is a virginia-class sub, can takeout both the barracuda, as well as the le-triomphant in one go.
Easy to say, but how can you argue about subs that have classified capabilities and subs whose construction has not even begun...

the best way to counter SSBNs is by using something like a SMX-23 coastal submarine
I don't think that SSBNs commander are dumb enough to schedule their patrol in coastal waters of a foreign/ennemy country. To hunt a SSBN, you need a good SSN.

[gf0012-aust]

a single USS-texas, which is a virginia-class sub, can takeout both the barracuda, as well as the le-triomphant in one go.


I'm not so sure I'd be making empirical statements like this.

One of the reasons why we ban discussions about who's plane(ship/tank/gun) is better than someone elses plane (ship/tank/gun) is because technology is only part of any equation.

National pride can be an absolute biatch when it comes to having sensible discussions.... :rolleyes:

[submerged]

Also capabilities are one thing, operating those capabilities is a different one ;) It will be interresting to see the upcoming ROV type drones, especially when u consider how much applications there allready are of them in the offshore market and such, they will make a nice extension of the normal capabilities of manned subs in some cases.

[gf0012-aust]

It will be interresting to see the upcoming ROV type drones, especially when u consider how much applications there allready are of them in the offshore market and such, they will make a nice extension of the normal capabilities of manned subs in some cases.

A substantial part of current ROV/USV/UUV technology is legacied from experience in the deep sea offshore environment....

its one of the few examples of the private sector influencing the military development.... usually the food chain is in reverse.

[tphuang]

A substantial part of current ROV/USV/UUV technology is legacied from experience in the deep sea offshore environment....

its one of the few examples of the private sector influencing the military development.... usually the food chain is in reverse.
I'm just wondering, how do ROV and UUV differ?
What would be considered a ROV and not a UUV and also vice versa?

[riksavage]

ROV – Remotely operated vehicle, as it states in the title, is remotely operated by someone on board a mother-ship. Often as not, mother and baby (ROV) are connected by an umbilical cord of some sort.

UUV – Are more advance and semi-autonomous. Programmed onboard the mother ship and released on a specific mission, which can be changed during the life-cycle of the assignment. Similar to an airborne equivalent such as Predator B. UUV is the way forward particularly for long range missions.

[submerged]

this is allmost correct alltho i also used the wrong terminoligy.

UUV's are Unmanned Undersea Vehicles, these can be distincted in Remotely Operated Vehicles (ROVs) and Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (AUVs). The difference between the AUV and the ROV is the presence (or absence) of direct hard-wire communication between the vehicle and the platform or autonomous operation with a RF link between the mothership, the USN often designates AUV's as UUV.