US Navy Virginia Class Nuclear Attack Submarines
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Hyperwarp
Captain
There were quotes at the beginning. I didn't close them. Will be more attentive in the future
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
The Need of the Virginia was dictated four fold.
1 Seawolf Was a Wallet Wolf.
2 although Capable in Shallow Water Seawolf is one of the USN's Largest Sub classes In terms of Beam and Tonnage ( Virginia is actually longer then Seawolf and Connecticut but not the Jimmy Carter)
3 Her Projected counter the Russian Akula and Typhoon were supposed too be wallowing in port
4 Seawolf Lacks VLS systems but packs a lot more of torpedoes and tubes making her better suited for submarine vs submarine as opposed too Cruise missile strikes Where Virginia is better suited.
Virginia was not however a total blank Slate. She barrows a lot from Seawolf. I consider Virginia a Seawolf on a Diet A kind of little sister submarine a kind of Seapuppy. they use much of the Same Sonar equipment, Torpedo Launchers, Virginia's use a Hull Geometry very very close too Seawolf, the Same Pump jet Identical ruder configurations.
Virginia Has one other Advantage though She was designed too be mission configurable. Meaning that she was built too be modified for future expansion, So If the NAVSEC came too the conclusion ( and a right one in my opinion) too Add a Special mission Boat too the fleet All they have too do is build a special mission plug and insert it into the Virginia chosen for the role. Or if they decide too build a SSBN once more build the fron build the tail build the missile bay and plug together.
1 Seawolf Was a Wallet Wolf.
2 although Capable in Shallow Water Seawolf is one of the USN's Largest Sub classes In terms of Beam and Tonnage ( Virginia is actually longer then Seawolf and Connecticut but not the Jimmy Carter)
3 Her Projected counter the Russian Akula and Typhoon were supposed too be wallowing in port
4 Seawolf Lacks VLS systems but packs a lot more of torpedoes and tubes making her better suited for submarine vs submarine as opposed too Cruise missile strikes Where Virginia is better suited.
Virginia was not however a total blank Slate. She barrows a lot from Seawolf. I consider Virginia a Seawolf on a Diet A kind of little sister submarine a kind of Seapuppy. they use much of the Same Sonar equipment, Torpedo Launchers, Virginia's use a Hull Geometry very very close too Seawolf, the Same Pump jet Identical ruder configurations.
Virginia Has one other Advantage though She was designed too be mission configurable. Meaning that she was built too be modified for future expansion, So If the NAVSEC came too the conclusion ( and a right one in my opinion) too Add a Special mission Boat too the fleet All they have too do is build a special mission plug and insert it into the Virginia chosen for the role. Or if they decide too build a SSBN once more build the fron build the tail build the missile bay and plug together.
Last edited:
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
New generation subs are going to have under water unmanned mini robots for mine clearing and the capability to launch special forces
They are not just hunter killer submarines but designed to be multiple purpose
They are not just hunter killer submarines but designed to be multiple purpose
Exactly...which the Virginia class is designed from the start to do. They are already testing very sophisticated robotic anti-mine and surveillance underwater robots out of the tubes on the Virginia. The surveillance robots are specifically designed to find very quiet diesel/electric AIP subs in the litorals and allow them to target those subs so the US sub can attack them without having to get too close, or do anything electronically to announce their presence before the attack.
My point is that a smaller, lower cost, hig tech Electric/Diesel AIP in the US inventory could do the same...but it would have to have the endurance to reach foreign shores and litorals and perfom such missions...which would probably mean forward basing in Japan, Guam, etc.
As it is, the Virginia class was designed to do this mission. among the other missions already noted.
do you think these might be available for export to Australia?
there are media reports doing the rounds these may be leased by Australia under a coalition government
there are precedents for the leasing/acquisition of nukes with the Canadians and Thatcher/Reagan
the german type 214s are regarded as being very good conventional boats
there are media reports doing the rounds these may be leased by Australia under a coalition government
there are precedents for the leasing/acquisition of nukes with the Canadians and Thatcher/Reagan
the german type 214s are regarded as being very good conventional boats
Last edited by a moderator:
The US wil not export nuclear power technology. Period. The cost for the RAN would be beyond their budget by millions. Right now the Aussie annual military budget is $28 Billion USD. a Virgina class sub cost $2.3 billion USD. nuff said!
are you refering to weapons or other defence assets?
How fast can the virginias really go? I heard 45knts
And are there any Russian subs that go faster?
check out the Australian Financial Review's website today AFR dot com -- big story --you can see it for free
And are there any Russian subs that go faster?
check out the Australian Financial Review's website today AFR dot com -- big story --you can see it for free
Last edited by a moderator:
Collins..stop posting one sentence at a time..I think you are trying to build your post count.
The answers to you questions are classified. try google and see what the answer may be.
5 minutes later.. I gotta go back to work..break over.
Collins that report is pure conjecture. In my opinion it shall not happen.
"If if and what were candy and nuts...we'd all have a Merry Christmas".
The answers to you questions are classified. try google and see what the answer may be.
5 minutes later.. I gotta go back to work..break over.
Collins that report is pure conjecture. In my opinion it shall not happen.
"If if and what were candy and nuts...we'd all have a Merry Christmas".
Last edited: