UK Subs, Equipment 6 tubes to 5 tubes to 6 tubes again?

Well, you might cut the hull clean through and through, insert a hullplug with VLS pre-installed and then weld the whole thing together again. I think that’s how AIP gets installed in some of older model subs.

I think it’s also how we fitted the new H core reactors

Bit difficult to upgrade a sub by cutting big lumps out of it and installing a vls, the upgraded Los Angeles class had vls installed when they were built.

Well, you might cut the hull clean through and through, insert a hullplug with VLS pre-installed and then weld the whole thing together again. I think that’s how AIP gets installed in some of older model subs.

If there is a person on this forum who isn’t:

a. doing exactly that
and
b. an unreasoning fanboy for at least one piece of nautical or aeronautical kit

Then I for one don’t trust them

Nicely put, but some will be more educated in certain areas than others. We must have a professional or 2 lurking somewhere and playing dumb.

I think that’s what most of us are doing;)

If there is a person on this forum who isn’t:

a. doing exactly that
and
b. an unreasoning fanboy for at least one piece of nautical or aeronautical kit

Then I for one don’t trust them

Fair enough, I’m just dossing round the forum looking to get a bit more educated in any case.

cheers

I think that’s what most of us are doing;)

Fair enough, I’m just dossing round the forum looking to get a bit more educated in any case.

cheers

Don’t worry, that’s pretty much what I do, I guess I’ve just been doing it for longer.

I wish my uni library had more of the Jane’s books, it’d be so much easier.

Bit difficult to upgrade a sub by cutting big lumps out of it and installing a vls, the upgraded Los Angeles class had vls installed when they were built.

Fair enough, I’m just dossing round the forum looking to get a bit more educated in any case.

cheers

Do they not? Ah well, not something I’d seen in print so wasn’t sure. I’d just assumed their eventual upgrades were similar to the US model.

Bit difficult to upgrade a sub by cutting big lumps out of it and installing a vls, the upgraded Los Angeles class had vls installed when they were built.

Urm, they Trafalgars and Swiftsures don’t have VLS?

Do they not? Ah well, not something I’d seen in print so wasn’t sure. I’d just assumed their eventual upgrades were similar to the US model.

I may, nay probably am, wrong – but was the design choice to forego VLS in favour of the extra torpedo tube not a question of the hydrodynamics of the submarine, given the weight distribution of the missiles forward of the sail near the top of the boat?

granted the rate of fire means that British subs will never be able to fire mass bombardments quickly – but then, given the paucity of British boats available and their general use within larger coalition (read, US) fleets, it seems like it wouldn’t be required, and that British boats might only ever have to open fire on select few high priority targets (particularly if CVF were to take the onus of land attack of the subs).

In that case it might seem like the RN wanted a boat that handled better – or at least differently according to mission type – to what the VLS equipped swiftsure/trafalgars do.

Urm, they Trafalgars and Swiftsures don’t have VLS?

I may, nay probably am, wrong – but was the design choice to forego VLS in favour of the extra torpedo tube not a question of the hydrodynamics of the submarine, given the weight distribution of the missiles forward of the sail near the top of the boat?

granted the rate of fire means that British subs will never be able to fire mass bombardments quickly – but then, given the paucity of British boats available and their general use within larger coalition (read, US) fleets, it seems like it wouldn’t be required, and that British boats might only ever have to open fire on select few high priority targets (particularly if CVF were to take the onus of land attack of the subs).

In that case it might seem like the RN wanted a boat that handled better – or at least differently according to mission type – to what the VLS equipped swiftsure/trafalgars do.

To be honest if you’ve got a vls then I’d agree that 4 tubes would be enough.

Agreed

8 tubes
or
4 tubes + 12 VLS

Both look pretty formidable to me

OBVIOUSLy
8 tubes + 12 VLS would be my choice, but then I have the luxury of not having to decide what else not to buy

I take it the US considers 4 tubes to be enough while the UK has felt 5-6 are better. I don’t know anything about reload times of tubes so i presume if you can reload and fire them fast (60 seconds) it may not be such an issue.

To be honest if you’ve got a vls then I’d agree that 4 tubes would be enough.

For the Viginina’s it says they have 4 tubes with the 12 VLS tubes for 27 weapons total. I presume this is 27 in the Torpedo room for the tubes with a seperate 12 Tomahawks in the VLS tubes. The 27 + 12 weapons total. If not this would only be 27 minus the 12 in the VLS = 15. Take the 4 that will be in the tubes this gives a storage of only 11 Torpedo’s. I think this is probably too low to be correct. Can anyone clarify this issue?

Also with the seawolf i think this has been discussed before but i’ve forgotted. Does it have 4 tubes that are 670mm and 4 533mm tubes. What are the larger tubes used for or what was there original role going to be when they were included in the design. The large size suggests some type of big torpedo or missile. Was there anything under development.

I take it the US considers 4 tubes to be enough while the UK has felt 5-6 are better. I don’t know anything about reload times of tubes so i presume if you can reload and fire them fast (60 seconds) it may not be such an issue.

Flip me

Is it really true that Seawolf’s have 8 torpedo tubes?

Seems to be absent any VLS though so mayhap this is why Virginias have dropped back to 4 tubes.

General Characteristics, Seawolf class
Armament: Tomahawk missiles, MK48 torpedoes, eight torpedo tubes
(according to Norman Polmar’s ‘ Naval Institute Guide to the ships and aircraft of the U.S. fleet’ p. 78 and p. 80, these are amidships mounted outward angled 670mm tubes with 50 weapons total)

General Characteristics, Virginia class
Armament: Tomahawk missiles, twelve VLS tubes, MK48 ADCAP torpedoes, four torpedo tubes
(according to Norman Polmar’s ‘ Naval Institute Guide to the ships and aircraft of the U.S. fleet’ p.75, these are amidships mounted outward angled 533mm tubes with 27 weapons total)

http://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?cid=4100&tid=100&ct=4

Polmar, Norman (2004). The Naval Institute guide to the ships and aircraft of the U.S. fleet (18 ed.). Annapolis: Naval Institute Press. pp. 81–82. ISBN 9781591146858

Flip me

Is it really true that Seawolf’s have 8 torpedo tubes?

Seems to be absent any VLS though so mayhap this is why Virginias have dropped back to 4 tubes.

Here is a picture of the LA class showing it’s VLS tubes. I’m not sure how many missiles fit in each cell but there are numbers on each cell that go up in 2’s so maybe it’s 2 in each cell. These are located further back from the front in what looks like a plug.

I’d love that to be the case

But:
Numbering starts at 6 (so I presume that 1 though 4 are for fish in t’bows)
The houses on the other side of my road have plates showing even numbers which go up in twos that doesn’t mean that each of them has two houses

So I suspect that its one missile per silo
We cannot see starboard central numbers so I’d GUESS at 5,7,9,13
We cannot see port outboard silos so I’d guess at 12,16
(Thus starboard outboard silos would be 11,15)

Harpoon has a much vaunted ability to follow two dog legs in its flightpath (which is why launchers fire out to the side they can be programmed to go 90 left or right after launch which older gen AShMs could not). Has any work gone into adapting/firing harpoon from these tomahawk silos? If I were Captain of a US SSN I’d like to be able to have my full complement of fish ready at all times. More broadly this would allow all ships with mk41 to use Harpoon.

The new Astute class has it torpedo tubes on view in this picture. this has the 6 tubes (3 on each side) in what i presume to be the same layout as the swiftsure Trafalgar class layout but with only 2 on each side. What is interesting is where the location of the 5th tube is on these boats. I’m still trying to find a picture of one of the boats before launch like the Astute picture. This would hopefully show the tubes.

This picture of one of the Vanguard class only has 4 tubes i think. They seem to be in the same place as the 6 on Astute. As the Vanguards were a new class i’m not sure how much bearing the previous class of Swiftsure and Trafalgar had on there design.

Just for fun i guess this is to help the captain get his TV working

When looking into the torpedo tube issue as to why they are equipped with 5 tubes instead of 6 i think the only explanation is that the location of the Sonar and the fact it is so big forces the tubes to be located down the sides and the RN have manged to squeeze and extra tube at the bottom. When looking at the US Los Angles class they only seem to have 4 torpedo tubes. I wasn’t sure if the RN borrowed that heavily from US technology and building techniques when building these subs that they would of basically taken the design of the front end of the LA class and used this in the Swiftsure design. If this was the case it would look like the RN managed to squeeze an extra tube when compared with the Americans. I don’t think Tomahawk would have bore much significance to the design of Swiftsure class as i don’t think it was available. Whether the RN were looking at sub harpoon or another anti ship missile and this maybe made the RN think that 5 tubes are better than 4 compared to the LA class. I’m not sure of torpedo tube reload speed but i imagine it’s not that fast seen as how the torpedo weighs about 2 tons. Here is a diagram i drew of what i think the layout may have been. Anyone is welcome to correct me or provide a better explanation.
[ATTACH]179956[/ATTACH]

I went to see the Spanish submarine Delfin in Torrevieja harbour (a must see for any visitor to Costa Blanca, It’s was decommissioned in 2003 and gifted to the town as a tourist attraction. They provide very good guided tours in English or other languages of the inside apart from the engine and battery room) It has 8 tubes on the front and 2 or 4 in the back but i don’t think these can be reloaded. These took up basically the whole front of the hull but i don’t think these could be reloaded at sea. Going by this i imagine the tubes and reloads on Swiftsure and Trafalgar take up a lot of space. The idea someone said about the 5th centre tube firing downwards bears some sense as when looking at the drawing i did the tube would either be going through the sonar or would have to have it own reload room as it would probably be on a different level from the other tubes. Is there a procedure for RN subs as to which torpedo tube fires first or is it just random. Thinking of this you may only get a RN sub firing a weapon from each tube a few times during testing during in its whole career.

Here is a picture of the LA class showing it’s VLS tubes. I’m not sure how many missiles fit in each cell but there are numbers on each cell that go up in 2’s so maybe it’s 2 in each cell. These are located further back from the front in what looks like a plug.