Most powerful Navy's in the world today?

[Lotus49]

And you're vastly underestimating submarines and their captains, especially when they're rigged for a silent running.

Yeah, nothing in war is certain. But, I know which boat I'd rather be on - what about you? Simply, the sub commander has to be both really good, and really lucky - in order to succeed in attacking his objective. But even if he manages to do that, he's pretty much guaranteed to die. Basically, everything has to completely go his way, to pull off a successful attack, and live to fight another day. In war, you're not often given this type scenario, setting & circumstance that will enable everything to transpire just exactly would ideally plan it.

The perfect water depth... a nice thermal layer... underwater terrain that masks the submarine... an active sonar sweep that doesn't return a distinctive object, and the fleet maneuvering straight towards you, at just the right angle and distance relative to your position, so you can make a sneak attack, undetected.

And then, assuming all this just falls into your lap, and you manage to attack, once you do - all hell breaks loose, and you're probably guaranteed to die. Same old, same old. So yeah, it's not impossible... it's just, incredibly difficult (with a good portion of it being sheer, blind luck). And yes, most decidedly: 'suicidal'.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

I didn't say anything about China's submarines. I was speaking of submarines in general.

Of course, you display a fundamental misunderstanding of submarine warfare. It's not like radar where you detect whether something's there or not, if the object in question is emitting no sound, it's exceedingly difficult to detect. All a Chinese sub skipper would have to do is ensure his vessel remains silent, something even older submarines are capable of, and he'd stand a good chance of being able to get into firing position.

There are other ways of detecting a submarine than that. What you're talking about is passive sonar, when you listen for the noises that another ship or boat makes. There are also active sonar, that's the audible *ping* and that'll lay out everything under the waves, even the most silent of submarines. Then there's a tool, I forget what it's called, but the P-3 Orion carries it, and I believe so does the S-3 Viking. You see, something as big and metal as a submarine makes it's own dent in the Earth's magnetic field. This tool can find that bend, and tell you where the sub is. Once you know where the sub is, you drop a sonar buoy, it pings away actively and paints the exact location of the sub, and you put a torp in the water, bye by submarine.

Of course, if the sub is already under the fleet, then both of these are going to be bad ideas. Active sonar is good for finding your opponent, but it has the great disadvantage of showing him the exact location of everything, too. Think of it in your Shaq scenario, it would be like flashing the lights on and off for one second, everyone instantly knows where everybody is. So if you set off active sonar inside the fleet, you've given him an accurate firing solution on your whole CBG. The magnetic field finder thing wouldn't work close-in, either, I imagine, a Nimitz supercarrier is multiple times heavier than most submarines, I'd imagine the presence of such massive tonnage would throw off your readings quite a bit.

 

[Evie]

On the other hand, it would make getting close to a CBG on battle alert a pretty hellish chore.

 

[MobBoss]

I didn't say anything about China's submarines. I was speaking of submarines in general.

Of course, you display a fundamental misunderstanding of submarine warfare. It's not like radar where you detect whether something's there or not, if the object in question is emitting no sound, it's exceedingly difficult to detect. All a Chinese sub skipper would have to do is ensure his vessel remains silent, something even older submarines are capable of, and he'd stand a good chance of being able to get into firing position.

Pasi, not exactly. There are more than just a few ways to detect subs these days. Not just with sonar. This for instance: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_anomaly_detector such a device would detect a sub running silent.

Also, to quote the wiki on sonar: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonar#Sonar_in_warfare

Active sonar is extremely useful, since it gives the exact position of an object. Active sonar works the same way as radar: a signal is emitted. The sound wave then travels in many directions from the emitting object. When it hits an object, the sound wave is then reflected in many other directions. Some of the energy will travel back to the emitting source. The echo will enable the sonar system or technician to calculate, with many factors such as the frequency, the energy of the received signal, the depth, the water temperature, etc., the position of the reflecting object. Using active sonar is somewhat hazardous however, since it does not allow the sonar to identify the target, and any vessel around the emitting sonar will detect the emission. Having heard the signal, it is easy to identify the type of sonar (usually with its frequency) and its position (with the sound wave's energy). Moreover, active sonar, similar to radar, allows the user to detect objects at a certain range but also enables other platforms to detect the active sonar at a far greater range.

Ooops. So I guess an active sonar could also detect a sub running silent.

So, before you wiggle your finger at someone elses 'fundamental misunderstanding' of submarine warfare....perhaps you should work on your own education some.

pwned. again.

 

[Pasi Nurminen]

There are other ways of detecting a submarine than that. What you're talking about is passive sonar, when you listen for the noises that another ship or boat makes. There are also active sonar, that's the audible *ping* and that'll lay out everything under the waves, even the most silent of submarines. Then there's a tool, I forget what it's called, but the P-3 Orion carries it, and I believe so does the S-3 Viking. You see, something as big and metal as a submarine makes it's own dent in the Earth's magnetic field. This tool can find that bend, and tell you where the sub is. Once you know where the sub is, you drop a sonar buoy, it pings away actively and paints the exact location of the sub, and you put a torp in the water, bye by submarine.

It's called a Magnetic Anomaly Detector, MAD. These things are not instantaneous anyways, and submarines do move. Not to mention that a carrier battle group gives off almost pornographic amounts of everything, so that often they will just blank out their own screens.

Sonobuoys have to be laid in a pattern to detect a submarine, and can't be used singly. In the time it takes to set up a field the submarine can have maneuvered out of the way and onto a new attack vector.

Besides which, using active sonar isn't possible in many circumstances. If the water is relatively shallow, as it is across most of China's territorial waters, and you use active sonar all you do is completely blank out your own sonar scopes with mindless noise while providing a big huge target for an enemy torpedo. American passive sonars don't tend to be as good as Chinese/Russian, so advantage China in that field.

I'm not saying it's easy to evade detection and fire on a carrier, but it's not impossible and a decent skipper could do it.

Of course, if the sub is already under the fleet, then both of these are going to be bad ideas. Active sonar is good for finding your opponent, but it has the great disadvantage of showing him the exact location of everything, too. Think of it in your Shaq scenario, it would be like flashing the lights on and off for one second, everyone instantly knows where everybody is. So if you set off active sonar inside the fleet, you've given him an accurate firing solution on your whole CBG. The magnetic field finder thing wouldn't work close-in, either, I imagine, a Nimitz supercarrier is multiple times heavier than most submarines, I'd imagine the presence of such massive tonnage would throw off your readings quite a bit.

None of these detection instruments work like just flipping a switch and seeing the enemy. Having a MAD contact isn't enough, a torpedo can't lock onto it so sooner or later you have to acquire it on sonar. Unless you can trap a submarine in a circular sonobuoy pattern or somehow get one real close it's going to be very difficult. Keep in mind that throughout all this the submarine is moving, it's not just waiting there to be detected.

 

[Disgustipated]

Pasi, the older Chinesse subs are *DEFINED* as noisy. It's the very core of their reputation. They would have to be incredibly lucky to put themselves in the right position long ahead of time, and hope the carriers won't change direction at the wrong time.

electric boats aren't noisy. As electric engines don't make any sound (or very little I should say)

Their main disadvantage is they have to surface and recharge their batteries.

Nuclear vessels are noisier because steam makes a lot of noise going through pipes (I had to wear hearing protection all the time). Although the noisiest thing is the reactor coolant pumps and main feed pumps. I can't discuss some designs of newer SSBN's, but let's just say they addressed one of those noise concerns. .

 

[Kozmos]

He's right, Kilo subs are one of the quietest on the planet. China is even making the improved design of it, via their close cooperation with the Russians.

 

[IglooDame]

It's called a Magnetic Anomaly Detector, MAD. These things are not instantaneous anyways, and submarines do move. Not to mention that a carrier battle group gives off almost pornographic amounts of everything, so that often they will just blank out their own screens.

MAD is a very limited-range sensor - on the order of a hundred yards or thereabouts. Unless the sub is virtually underneath a surface unit, MAD will discriminate between them.

Sonobuoys have to be laid in a pattern to detect a submarine, and can't be used singly. In the time it takes to set up a field the submarine can have maneuvered out of the way and onto a new attack vector.

Even helos flying at 50kts dropping a line of sonobuoys are an order of magnitude faster than a submarine staying slow and quiet to avoid detection. Also, there are active and passive sonobuoys - a passive one can give bearings, and active ones give ranges. Triangulating or simply focusing on whichever one is giving the best hit is not really time-intensive calculation as you imply.

Besides which, using active sonar isn't possible in many circumstances. If the water is relatively shallow, as it is across most of China's territorial waters, and you use active sonar all you do is completely blank out your own sonar scopes with mindless noise while providing a big huge target for an enemy torpedo. American passive sonars don't tend to be as good as Chinese/Russian, so advantage China in that field.

I'm curious as to what your source is for Chinese/Russian vs American passive sonars.

I'm not saying it's easy to evade detection and fire on a carrier, but it's not impossible and a decent skipper could do it.

Likewise, but change "decent skipper" to "very good, somewhat lucky skipper with good boat".

None of these detection instruments work like just flipping a switch and seeing the enemy. Having a MAD contact isn't enough, a torpedo can't lock onto it so sooner or later you have to acquire it on sonar. Unless you can trap a submarine in a circular sonobuoy pattern or somehow get one real close it's going to be very difficult. Keep in mind that throughout all this the submarine is moving, it's not just waiting there to be detected.

Actually the P-3 and S-3 guys do use MAD contacts as a drop reference - they'll drop a Mk46 or Mk50 on the MAD contact and let the torp do the work from there. And as I said - the sub is moving slowly, yes, but if they hit the accelerator pedal you get a bunch of sonar operators on the towed-array surface ships going "oooh, look at that!"

 

[nc-1701]

Something people are forgetting is that a carrier costs orders of magnitude more than a submarine maybe you submarine can oinly hit a carrier 1 out of every four times. So you lose four subs maybe 10,000 tonnes each, but take out a 100,000 tonne carrier, sounds good to me.

Also the Chinese/Russian Kilo submarines like their American counterparts can launch ASM from up to a hundred or so knots away. Ranges at which a submarine is virtually impossible to detect.

 

[Abaddon]

No one throws more money at in than the japs right?

 

[IglooDame]

Something people are forgetting is that a carrier costs orders of magnitude more than a submarine maybe you submarine can oinly hit a carrier 1 out of every four times. So you lose four subs maybe 10,000 tonnes each, but take out a 100,000 tonne carrier, sounds good to me.

Also the Chinese/Russian Kilo submarines like their American counterparts can launch ASM from up to a hundred or so knots away. Ranges at which a submarine is virtually impossible to detect.

knots are speed, nautical miles are range. Anyway, to launch an ASM you need to know where your target is, to at least some limited degree. Where carrier battle groups tend to excel is at preventing the enemy from acquiring targeting data in the first place.

To say nothing of substantial anti-missile defenses that the battlegroup has...

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Something people are forgetting is that a carrier costs orders of magnitude more than a submarine maybe you submarine can oinly hit a carrier 1 out of every four times. So you lose four subs maybe 10,000 tonnes each, but take out a 100,000 tonne carrier, sounds good to me.

There are only 36 Kilo submarines, of which Red China only has two.

Also the Chinese/Russian Kilo submarines like their American counterparts can launch ASM from up to a hundred or so knots away. Ranges at which a submarine is virtually impossible to detect.

Knots is a measurement of speed. Perhaps you mean nautical miles.

Either way, the Kilo class has no vertical launch tubes, it can't fire an antiship missle. But assuming it could, its not like you just throw a missle up in the air, and it finds its own target, you would have to maintain a consistent lock on the fleet to fire it.

But you see, you don't wait for a submarine to get in firing range to find it, there are always ASM helos, Orions, Vikings, and Destroyers that are constantly maintaining a secure area around the fleet. Not that you could fire an ASM from a hundred miles away. The primary Chinese ASM are the P-15 Termit (range 80 KM), the Silkworm (range 150km, but it can't target large vessels), or the YJ-82 (range 120km), but that can only be launched from either a DDG or aircraft. Again, these are maximum ranges, it's not as if when you get within 120km of a carrier (which you won't) your targeting crosshairs go red and start beeping with a lock on the Kennedy.

 

[Evie]

He's right, Kilo subs are one of the quietest on the planet. China is even making the improved design of it, via their close cooperation with the Russians.

You know, I did say the OLDER CHinesse boats are defined as noisy.

I specified several time overs that the Kilo (and the Song) were all good ships, but there's only ever about twenty to twenty-five of them in service all together (and possibly some of China's twelve kilo have yet to enter service, so it could be less than twenty right this moment).

The older boats - the Romeo, the Ming, that inflates China's submarine count to make it appear much larger - are indeed noisy.

 

[nc-1701]

There are only 36 Kilo submarines, of which Red China only has two.

Right now there are 4, but there are 8 more currently being built.
Linky

Knots is a measurement of speed. Perhaps you mean nautical miles.

Yeah

Either way, the Kilo class has no vertical launch tubes, it can't fire an antiship missle. But assuming it could, its not like you just throw a missle up in the air, and it finds its own target, you would have to maintain a consistent lock on the fleet to fire it.

Spoiler :

The eight new Project 636M submarines currently under construction in Russia are reported to be fitted with the Novator 3M-54E submarine-launched anti-ship missile as part of the Klub-S missile system. The missile has a maximum range of 220km and a 450kg high-explosive warhead.

From the same link...

But you see, you don't wait for a submarine to get in firing range to find it, there are always ASM helos, Orions, Vikings, and Destroyers that are constantly maintaining a secure area around the fleet. Not that you could fire an ASM from a hundred miles away. The primary Chinese ASM are the P-15 Termit (range 80 KM), the Silkworm (range 150km, but it can't target large vessels), or the YJ-82 (range 120km), but that can only be launched from either a DDG or aircraft. Again, these are maximum ranges, it's not as if when you get within 120km of a carrier (which you won't) your targeting crosshairs go red and start beeping with a lock on the Kennedy.

Remember the submarine will be able to use Chinese fleet units, and AWACS to support it's launching of missiles. Also you assume that I belive Chinese submarines could beat America, they can't, but they could probably cause signifigant damage. Now Japan, or France have much weaker/smaller fleets with vastly weeker AS capabillities, would be in far more trouble. The submarine fleets of the US, and Russia clearly put them on top, Russias Akula, Oscar II, and Kilo's are all excellent ships available in sufficient numbers to contest the sea with any navy, only to fear Americas. America has Los Angelas, Seawlf, and Virginia class subs all of which are top of the line and could mess up any other nations navy quite badly.

 

[Brighteye]

The most powerful navy's what?

The most powerful navy's consumption of Durex extra strong ribbed? Must be pretty high, given the sexuality of sailors.

 

[Jenko1]

I think you are all confusing numbers of ships with power.
The UK has some pretty powerfull ships and quite a large submarine force.
The recent developments of the navy in the UK are also impressive. The Astute class submarine that can sail without ever needing to refuel. The first is undergoing sea trails with others on the production line. The type 45 destroyers thje most advanced on the planet. Again the first undergoing sea trials with another 5 ordered and the possibility of another 3 to be ordered. The current carrier force of 3 being replaced by the 2 larger aircraft carriers. These carriers each will have more power than the current 3 combined. I think navy's at present anf for the forceeable future are
1. US
2. UK with an increasing ability.
3. France
4. Russia.
5. Japan
6. China

 

[bathsheba666]

Britain is very capable with all of the logistical support. Which is why Britain was able to send a fleet all the way to the freaking Falklands, while Indonesia never could support such an operation.

"was able to" is certainly the correct tense.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

I think you are all confusing numbers of ships with power.
The UK has some pretty powerfull ships and quite a large submarine force.
The recent developments of the navy in the UK are also impressive. The Astute class submarine that can sail without ever needing to refuel. The first is undergoing sea trails with others on the production line. The type 45 destroyers thje most advanced on the planet. Again the first undergoing sea trials with another 5 ordered and the possibility of another 3 to be ordered. The current carrier force of 3 being replaced by the 2 larger aircraft carriers. These carriers each will have more power than the current 3 combined. I think navy's at present anf for the forceeable future are
1. US
2. UK with an increasing ability.
3. France
4. Russia.
5. Japan
6. China

I'll remind, you, though, that the Royal Navy has only slightly more ships in the water as the US Navy does submarines alone.

Ohio class (18 in commission) — ballistic missile submarines with four to be converted into guided missile submarines
Los Angeles class (49 in commission, 13 decommissioned) — attack submarines
Seawolf class (3 in commission) — attack submarines
Virginia class (3 in commission, 3 under construction, 5 more planned) — attack submarines

73 total

Spoiler :

Major Surface Combatants

Invincible-class aircraft carrier
[edit] Invincible-class Aircraft carriers (3)
HMS Invincible (R05) - decommissioned, effectively in reserve [1]
HMS Illustrious (R06)
HMS Ark Royal (R07) - flagship of the active fleet

[edit] Type 45 destroyers (1)
At sea - awaiting commission.


[edit] Type 42 destroyers (8)

Sheffield class batches 1 & 2 Type 42 destroyerHMS Exeter (D89)
HMS Southampton (D90)
HMS Nottingham (D91)
HMS Liverpool (D92)
HMS Manchester (D95)
HMS Gloucester (D96)

Manchester class batch 3 Type 42 destroyerHMS Edinburgh (D97)
HMS York (D98)

[edit] Type 23 frigates (13)
HMS Argyll (F231)
HMS Lancaster (F229)
HMS Iron Duke (F234)
HMS Monmouth (F235)
HMS Montrose (F236)

Duke class Type 23 frigateHMS Westminster (F237)
HMS Northumberland (F238)
HMS Richmond (F239)
HMS Somerset (F82)
HMS Sutherland (F81)
HMS Kent (F78)
HMS Portland (F79)
HMS St Albans (F83)

Broadsword class Type 22 frigate
[edit] Type 22 frigates (4)
HMS Cornwall (F99)
HMS Cumberland (F85)
HMS Campbeltown (F86)
HMS Chatham (F87)

[edit] Amphibious Forces

Ocean class landing platform helicopter
[edit] Landing Platform Helicopter (1)
HMS Ocean (L12)

Albion class landing platform dock
[edit] Albion-class landing platform docks (2)
HMS Albion (L14)
HMS Bulwark (L15)

[edit] Mine Warfare Forces

[edit] Sandown-class mine countermeasures vessels (8)
HMS Walney (M104)
HMS Penzance (M106)
HMS Pembroke (M107)
HMS Grimsby (M108)
HMS Bangor (M109)
HMS Ramsey (M110)
HMS Blyth (M111)
HMS Shoreham (M112)

[edit] Hunt-class mine countermeasures vessels (8)
HMS Ledbury (M30)
HMS Cattistock (M31)
HMS Brocklesby (M33)
HMS Middleton (M34)
HMS Chiddingfold (M37)
HMS Atherstone (M38)
HMS Hurworth (M39)
HMS Quorn (M41)

[edit] Patrol Vessels

[edit] Antarctic patrol ship (1)
HMS Endurance (A171)

[edit] River-class patrol vessels (4)
HMS Mersey (P283)
HMS Severn (P282)
HMS Tyne (P281)
HMS Clyde (P257) (modified River class)

HMS Example (P165) on the River Tyne at HMS Calliope, Gateshead
[edit] Castle-class patrol vessels (1)
HMS Dumbarton Castle (P265)

[edit] Archer or P2000-class fast patrol boats (14)
HMS Archer (P264)
HMS Biter (P270)
HMS Smiter (P272)
HMS Blazer (P279)
HMS Puncher (P291)

HMS Archer (P264) and HMS Example (P165) on the River Tyne at HMS Calliope, GatesheadHMS Charger (P292)
HMS Ranger (P293)
HMS Trumpeter (P294)
HMS Express (P163)
HMS Example (P165)
HMS Explorer (P164)
HMS Exploit (P167)
HMS Tracker (P274)
HMS Raider (P275)

[edit] Scimitar-class fast patrol boats (Gibraltar Squadron) (2)
HMS Scimitar (P284)
HMS Sabre (P285)

[edit] Archer or P2000-class fast patrol boats (Cyprus Squadron) (2)
HMS Pursuer (P273)
HMS Dasher (P280)

[edit] Survey Vessels

[edit] Ocean survey vessel (1)
HMS Scott (H131)

[edit] Coastal survey vessels (2)
HMS Roebuck (H130)
HMSML Gleaner (H86)

[edit] Echo-class multi-purpose survey vessels (2)
HMS Echo (H87)
HMS Enterprise (H88)

[edit] Submarines

[edit] Vanguard-class submarines (SSBNs) (4)
HMS Vanguard (S28)
HMS Victorious (S29)
HMS Vigilant (S30)
HMS Vengeance (S31)

[edit] Astute-class submarines (SSNs) (0)
Under construction


[edit] Trafalgar-class submarines (SSNs) (7)
HMS Trafalgar (S107)
HMS Turbulent (S87)
HMS Tireless (S88)
HMS Torbay (S90)
HMS Trenchant (S91)
HMS Talent (S92)
HMS Triumph (S93)

[edit] Swiftsure-class submarines (SSNs) (2)
HMS Superb (S109)
HMS Sceptre (S104)

86 total

 

[Patroklos]

This thead is mildly amusing, so many assumptions!

So how exactly does a submarine use surface/satelite/air (China doesn't have AWACS btw) targeting?

In any case, China doesn't have link capability, or at most a very rudamentry version. When they can feild a LINK 4A equivalent I will take notice. When they can field a LINK 11 of LINK 16 network I might consider them major league, but just a crappy expansion team.

And gentlemen, let us not forget strike warfare. Every CG/DDG in the US fleet has the ability to destroy the top 25-30 priority targets in your country itself (TLAM).

 

[Goonie]

I think without American help, China would swallow Japan...

How?

China has no real deep sea capabilities.

China's navy is pathetic.