4 ms·

do you have some relevant expertise to offer? the basic claim that effective range is halved or more against a target moving half as fast as you seems to make

do you have some relevant expertise to offer? the basic claim that effective range is halved or more against a target moving half as fast as you seems to make sense. I have no idea to what extent torpedoes need guidance from the launcher.

CamperBob2 7y ago
No, I don't, but I'm pretty sure a carrier that's presumably not already "running away" can't hit the gas and accelerate meaningfully when it detects an enemy torpedo launch less than an hour away. Intuitively, evasive maneuvers don't seem to be a useful tool in a carrier's defensive arsenal, but I'd be interested in hearing otherwise.
- liability 7y ago
  Carriers can move very aggressively for ships of their size: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TN7BjeRad2I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TN7BjeRad2I At the moment I can't find how long it takes them to step on the gas, maybe that's classified or something, but it's pretty clear they can at least turn around quickly once they're going fast. Of course, deck operations,etc might delay such maneuvers. My guess? If modern warships can't maneuver effectively against traditional torpedoes, Russia would not have spent the money developing supercavitating torpedoes.
  - Retric 7y ago
    That looks impressive, but costs a lot of speed. It’s mostly useful for an aircraft carrier to hide behind another ship rather than directly avoiding torpedoes in open water. As to acceleration they are something like 2.5 HP to the long ton. So picture a 5 HP car on ice.
    - liability 7y ago
      There are scenarios where simply being able to stop quickly is evasive. If the torpedo has a 50 km range and the submarine captain assumes it takes you a 1 km to stop, the submarine could attack from 51 km away. When your target is slow to decelerate or change course, you have a greater effective range when attacking from from the front. All forms of acceleration (be it speeding up, slowing down, or turning) will modify the effective range of enemy torpedoes as a function of launch position relative to the ship. Consider even a ship moving at a constant speed and heading. If you draw a line around the ship to represent the maximum range of a constant speed torpedo aimed at the ship, that line won't be circular. If you abstract away water drag and assume submarines can move as fast as carriers, then the line would be circular. But in reality drag on the torpedo means that sub can't simply match speeds with the carrier and expect the speeds of the torpedo and the sub to add up. The torpedoe's top speed is relative to the stationary water, not to its launching submarine.
  - mrep 7y ago
    Step on the gas? They never stop moving! By constantly moving, the airplanes have 30 knots less to accelerate to reach flight speed and 30 knots less to deaccelerate when landing. They're also nuclear powered so it's not like that extra energy actually costs you much.
p2detar 7y ago
The way I read it, that concerns an attack by a single submarine. So what if there are a dozen or more enemy submarine. Is taking out a carrier for 2 or 3 subs a meaningful war exchange?
- alexhutcheson 7y ago
  A dozen submarines would be an enormous group: China and Russia each only have about a dozen nuclear attack submarines, and non-nuclear submarines don't have the undersea range to get close to a carrier battle group undetected. It would be a huge gamble to throw them all in one attack. The other problem is that the submarines would have no way to communicate without giving away their position. It would be very difficult to execute any sort of coordinated operation.
  - p2detar 7y ago
    Thanks! (Not sure why the downvotes, it was an honest question.)
Retric 7y ago
An obvious counter example is Aircraft carriers need to refuel for their aircraft regularly and can’t travel quickly during this process. Nor can they accelerate quickly if caught in such a situation. Further, to be useful aircraft carriers need to stay near their targets and a few subs acting in concert can lie in it’s probable path. Think one sub every ~30 miles in a line sweeping slowly and they can close the trap. On top of that subs can also launch missiles not just torpedo’s.
- alexhutcheson 7y ago
  > On top of that subs can also launch missiles not just torpedo’s. From the blog post: "Or can they avoid this by using missiles? Unfortunately, this is not likely to be a healthy choice. At best, an SSN might be able to fire 18 missiles in a single salvo. Even with the benefit of popping up close to the target (which requires going through a lot of those same defenses they’re trying to avoid), this is unlikely to be enough. Launching missiles is extremely noisy, and Aegis is set up to take cues from sonar. The missiles will likely be shot down, and the patch of sea the submarine launched from is not going to be a safe place."
  - Retric 7y ago
    Limits like 18 missiles are very easy to change in a war. Firing 100 vs 18 does not involve some huge leaps in technology, just a different focus. Subs are extremely dangerous places or be in a war and should expect heavy casualties. However, from a military standpoint if the sub is destroyed after taking out an aircraft carrier that’s a major win.
- wbl 7y ago
  You forgot the sub attached to the carrier is hunting for those subs, and planes can fly quite far. Missiles have to deal with CIWS and RAM.
  - Retric 7y ago
    Several ways around CIWS. Simply having enough missiles in the air works, but you can also do things like add armor or even forgo high explosive payloads relying instead on kinetic energy. Aircraft carriers are huge targets and it's the weapon systems you don't know about that are the largest risks.

CamperBob2 7y ago

No, I don't, but I'm pretty sure a carrier that's presumably not already "running away" can't hit the gas and accelerate meaningfully when it detects an enemy torpedo launch less than an hour away. Intuitively, evasive maneuvers don't seem to be a useful tool in a carrier's defensive arsenal, but I'd be interested in hearing otherwise.

liability 7y ago
Carriers can move very aggressively for ships of their size: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TN7BjeRad2I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TN7BjeRad2I At the moment I can't find how long it takes them to step on the gas, maybe that's classified or something, but it's pretty clear they can at least turn around quickly once they're going fast. Of course, deck operations,etc might delay such maneuvers. My guess? If modern warships can't maneuver effectively against traditional torpedoes, Russia would not have spent the money developing supercavitating torpedoes.
- Retric 7y ago
  That looks impressive, but costs a lot of speed. It’s mostly useful for an aircraft carrier to hide behind another ship rather than directly avoiding torpedoes in open water. As to acceleration they are something like 2.5 HP to the long ton. So picture a 5 HP car on ice.
  - liability 7y ago
    There are scenarios where simply being able to stop quickly is evasive. If the torpedo has a 50 km range and the submarine captain assumes it takes you a 1 km to stop, the submarine could attack from 51 km away. When your target is slow to decelerate or change course, you have a greater effective range when attacking from from the front. All forms of acceleration (be it speeding up, slowing down, or turning) will modify the effective range of enemy torpedoes as a function of launch position relative to the ship. Consider even a ship moving at a constant speed and heading. If you draw a line around the ship to represent the maximum range of a constant speed torpedo aimed at the ship, that line won't be circular. If you abstract away water drag and assume submarines can move as fast as carriers, then the line would be circular. But in reality drag on the torpedo means that sub can't simply match speeds with the carrier and expect the speeds of the torpedo and the sub to add up. The torpedoe's top speed is relative to the stationary water, not to its launching submarine.
- mrep 7y ago
  Step on the gas? They never stop moving! By constantly moving, the airplanes have 30 knots less to accelerate to reach flight speed and 30 knots less to deaccelerate when landing. They're also nuclear powered so it's not like that extra energy actually costs you much.

p2detar 7y ago

The way I read it, that concerns an attack by a single submarine. So what if there are a dozen or more enemy submarine. Is taking out a carrier for 2 or 3 subs a meaningful war exchange?

alexhutcheson 7y ago
A dozen submarines would be an enormous group: China and Russia each only have about a dozen nuclear attack submarines, and non-nuclear submarines don't have the undersea range to get close to a carrier battle group undetected. It would be a huge gamble to throw them all in one attack. The other problem is that the submarines would have no way to communicate without giving away their position. It would be very difficult to execute any sort of coordinated operation.
- p2detar 7y ago
  Thanks! (Not sure why the downvotes, it was an honest question.)

Retric 7y ago

An obvious counter example is Aircraft carriers need to refuel for their aircraft regularly and can’t travel quickly during this process. Nor can they accelerate quickly if caught in such a situation. Further, to be useful aircraft carriers need to stay near their targets and a few subs acting in concert can lie in it’s probable path. Think one sub every ~30 miles in a line sweeping slowly and they can close the trap. On top of that subs can also launch missiles not just torpedo’s.

alexhutcheson 7y ago
> On top of that subs can also launch missiles not just torpedo’s. From the blog post: "Or can they avoid this by using missiles? Unfortunately, this is not likely to be a healthy choice. At best, an SSN might be able to fire 18 missiles in a single salvo. Even with the benefit of popping up close to the target (which requires going through a lot of those same defenses they’re trying to avoid), this is unlikely to be enough. Launching missiles is extremely noisy, and Aegis is set up to take cues from sonar. The missiles will likely be shot down, and the patch of sea the submarine launched from is not going to be a safe place."
- Retric 7y ago
  Limits like 18 missiles are very easy to change in a war. Firing 100 vs 18 does not involve some huge leaps in technology, just a different focus. Subs are extremely dangerous places or be in a war and should expect heavy casualties. However, from a military standpoint if the sub is destroyed after taking out an aircraft carrier that’s a major win.
wbl 7y ago
You forgot the sub attached to the carrier is hunting for those subs, and planes can fly quite far. Missiles have to deal with CIWS and RAM.
- Retric 7y ago
  Several ways around CIWS. Simply having enough missiles in the air works, but you can also do things like add armor or even forgo high explosive payloads relying instead on kinetic energy. Aircraft carriers are huge targets and it's the weapon systems you don't know about that are the largest risks.