Submarines

Post drawings of ships that actually exist or have existed at some point.

Moderator: Community Manager

Message
Author
User avatar
Demon Lord Razgriz
Posts: 446
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 1:18 am
Location: Eastern North Carolina

Re: End of a era

#151 Post by Demon Lord Razgriz »

Philbob wrote:Good bye USS Los Angles

>snip<

http://www.navy.mil/management/photodb/ ... 0W-071.jpg
She is in remarkably good looking shape for her age.
Indeed, perhaps she's still good enough to be sold to an allied nation?

And this might be more fitted to be its own thread in the Off Topic section?
95% of my drawings are destined for NS, 4.9% for fun, & .1% serious.
Worklist:
Space Shuttle
Atlas V
Delta II/III
Project Constellation
Soyuz series
User avatar
klagldsf
Posts: 2765
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 4:14 pm

Re: End of a era

#152 Post by klagldsf »

Demon Lord Razgriz wrote:Indeed, perhaps she's still good enough to be sold to an allied nation?
There are two reasons why Los Angeles is being retired, but it really all boils down to the same reason: it's an old boat.

It's obsolete, and it's surprising that she stuck around as long as she has. She doesn't have any VLS tubes (which frankly, actually, isn't that big of a deal in this target-poor era, as submarines are much more likely to be loaded with Tomahawks in the torpedo tubes anyway, but it hampers her ability to engage in future truly-strategic planning), she's relatively noisy in this day and age (really, if you're not quieter than your enemy, you're noisy - and the Russians and Chinese have quieter boats now, even if only just now, especially in the latter case) and most damning of all, her electronics are old as hell. She still has 386 processors!

But moreover, she's just old. There are a lot of miles on that hull. Ships wear out. Hulls get thinner with friction against the very surface they ride upon. Metal fatigues with stress from riding waves. Things wear out inside just from having people walk around the ship all day. Of course, for the most part this is microscopic, or at best barely macroscopic in scope, but I suspect the big reason, age-wise, why she's being retired is fuel. Long story short, we don't refuel nuke boats anymore, we just retire them. Your latest reactors, because they go so long now, aren't even designed with any provisions for refueling at all - you remove the spent rods when you scrap the ship. And even on ships designed for refueling, it's so expensive, and these ships are often obsolete in a shrinking fleet anyway, that it remains true even for them.

Also, there have already been 688 class boats scrapped ahead of Los Angeles. Yes, newer hulls.
erik_t
Posts: 2936
Joined: July 26th, 2010, 11:38 pm
Location: Midwest US

Re: Submarines

#153 Post by erik_t »

Current versions of Tomahawk cannot be fired out of 21" torpedo tubes.
User avatar
klagldsf
Posts: 2765
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 4:14 pm

Re: Submarines

#154 Post by klagldsf »

Oh, didn't know that either.

That further limits Los Angeles' ability to serve in a battlefleet, as it basically means the sub is useless until that theoretical "big one" with China/Russia (it's my understanding these 688 boats are pretty poor at special forces insertion too).
User avatar
odysseus1980
Posts: 3609
Joined: November 8th, 2010, 8:53 am
Location: Athens,Hellenic Kingdom
Contact:

Re: Submarines

#155 Post by odysseus1980 »

Thank you!
User avatar
klagldsf
Posts: 2765
Joined: July 28th, 2010, 4:14 pm

Re: Submarines

#156 Post by klagldsf »

odysseus1980 wrote:Thank you!
You're welcome.

But yeah, the 688's are on their way out, for all the reasons I (and Erik) outlined.
Sheriff
Posts: 48
Joined: September 5th, 2010, 7:13 am

Re: Submarines

#157 Post by Sheriff »

Novice wrote:The raison d'être for the Gymnote
the nuclear powered SSBN Le Redoutable

comments anyone?
Would an SNLE be carrying SM.39 Exocet?
Novice
Posts: 4126
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 5:25 am
Location: Vrijstaat

Re: Submarines

#158 Post by Novice »

Sheriff wrote:
Novice wrote:The raison d'être for the Gymnote
the nuclear powered SSBN Le Redoutable

comments anyone?
Would an SNLE be carrying SM.39 Exocet?
Well, according to French Navy official site the answer is yes.
Image Thank you Kim for the crest

"Never fear to try on something new. Remember that the Titanic was built by professionals, and the Ark by an amateur"
User avatar
odysseus1980
Posts: 3609
Joined: November 8th, 2010, 8:53 am
Location: Athens,Hellenic Kingdom
Contact:

Re: Submarines

#159 Post by odysseus1980 »

Thanks for SNLE Redoutable! Now newer SNLE family members should follow,such as Le Triomphant.
Novice
Posts: 4126
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 5:25 am
Location: Vrijstaat

Re: Submarines

#160 Post by Novice »

odysseus1980 wrote:Thanks for SNLE Redoutable! Now newer SNLE family members should follow,such as Le Triomphant.
On the stock thanks to Darthpanda :?
Image Thank you Kim for the crest

"Never fear to try on something new. Remember that the Titanic was built by professionals, and the Ark by an amateur"
Post Reply