"The Chinese Navy Is Claiming That They Have Designed..." Topic

… The World's First Supersonic Submarine.

"In the annals of vehicular locomotion, the submarine is the equivalent of the Walkman. It dazzled the masses when it hit, flexing nuclear-tipped missiles that completed the so-called "nuclear triad" of deterrence.

But other technologies soon surpassed it in terms of speed and agility. Now, years later, the submarine may be making a comeback — at least theoretically. Researchers at the Harbin Institute of Technology in northeast China tell the South China Morning Post that they're hard at work on a submarine that the newspaper claims could travel the 6,100 miles from "Shanghai to San Francisco in 100 minutes."

Full article here
link

Amicalement
Armand

As I recall, there's a lot more things in the ocean to hit than there are in the sky. It might be a nice time to work on the ecology of our oceans because a school of tuna might save us from nuclear destruction.

The Russians have had similar technology in use for their torpedoes for some time with variable success (can you say 'Kiev'?) and I think the UK and US have both experimented with this and decided it was not worthwhile. It is incredibly noisy and makes it relatively easy to locate the noise maker.

Yawn…wont happen.

But other technologies soon surpassed it in terms of speed and agility.

What technologies have surpassed submarines in these areas, and also have the same capabilities that submarines have?

Doug

Gee, just a few days ago they proposed it and today here it is. I'll believe it when I see it.

The problem is that you need to clear 3,000 knots speed to exceed the speed of sound in the water.

However, it would make the present location of the sub impossible to determine via sonar.

Those supercavitating torpedoes made sense for the Russians/Soviets, since they could not detect NATO subs at the ranges we could detect them. Now, since they could hear the torpedo launch significantly farther than they they could detect the sub, the 200+knot torpedoes could be launched at the position of the launch signature in the hopes of forcing the NATO sub to maneuver and cut the guidance wire.

Those supercavitating torpedoes

I thought that the whole purpose of the Shkval was to be fitted with a nuke and fired at the CVN from long range, and then escape in the confusion.

Given the short range of a Shkval, a nuke warhead would be BAD for the Russian sub. I do NOT want to be within 7000m of a nuclear blast, especially one under water!

The Soviets made 650mm torpedoes for shooting carriers.

I gotta sorta kinda disagree with you. A Shkval without a nuke makes no sense. It's like using Poseiden to deliver leaflets. High speed combined with limited (inertial) guidance argues for a large target (CVN) and a nuke means any hit is a kill. 7K might be uncomfortable, but apparently the Russians considered it survivable. We're talking a Tac-nuke not a Castle Bravo. At any rate the current Shkval has approx double the range. With a conventional explosive you need a really big torp to cause significant damage to a well armored 100,000 ton ship, and maybe multiple hits as well. Less risk to the firer with shoot and scoot because the nuke explosion is more likely to blind the sensors and allow the sub to escape. Maybe?

Thing is, you don't need super-high speed to torpedo a carrier. 45 knots is plenty fast for that job. You do need lots of boom, but most subs will salvo 2-4 torps at a carrier.

Where you DO need speed is your reply snapshot when your sub gets a torpedo shot at it. The proper initial response on hearing a torpedo in the water is "all ahead flank, hard rudder to escape course, go deep, snapshot tube #whatever"

The reply snapshot is there to force the other sub to cut the wire and evade your fish, which makes their torpedo less likely to hit you by virtue of no guidance from the launching ship (a torpedo's guidance sonar has a very narrow field of view compared to a subs sonar).