Submarine War Tactics

[Jliu]

In a book of PN history, perhaps called, SENTINELS OF THE SEA, I read war mission and in that they mentioned that the submarine left "FALSE TRACKS"........I want to understand that if a submarine is going in one direction, how can it leave tracks in an another direction.........naval experts please.....

Eject a decoy/simulator the opposite direction/bearing at a similar decibal (db) count to attempt to confuse the other boat's passive sonars.

I would be interesting to know that how the Pakistan Navy deals with the SOSUS system of USA........it was a top-secret underwater surveillance system against submarines, especially russian submarines...........SOSUS network covered almost all the important areas of the world..........now that SOSUS has been declassified, I am sure a new more complex secret underwater surveillance may have been commissioned.....

Modern Towed Array system largely eliminate the need for fixed sensor networks such as SOSUS. However in a regional confined setting such as the Indo-Pak maritime border both nations have the littorals wired for sound with SOSUS-like seabed arrays.

What I understand from the Naval Magazines available in the shops is that Hunter Killer Submarines dont dog fight. It is always an ambush. If you can detect the other submarine before she detects you, you simply wait and let her come within range, then Bingo.

In wartime submarines fulfill the critical roles of INT gathering, sea denial, and search and destroy profiles. HK subs are usually SSNs and hence leverage their superior speed and sensors to deploy in ambush positions in advance while conventionals utlise preplanned ambush positions due to inferior sonar power and speed compared to SSNs but comparitively higher "stealth". It is rare for two submarines to blunder into each other but should they do or they detect each other at approx the same time then it rapidly becomes a knifefight in the dark as both boats attempt to gain a range and bearing count on the other to fire off torpedoes/decoys with passive sonars-active is only ever used by SSNs for obvious reasons. However in peacetime submarines attempt to track each other and discover as much about the acoustic signature and hull profiles of adversaries (and even allies) as much as possible. In these situations certain types of active sonar may be used for this purpose at the risk of revealing the location of your own boat (but with SSNs not so much risk).

 

[vish]

It is rare for two submarines to blunder into each other but should they do or they detect each other at approx the same time then it rapidly becomes a knifefight in the dark as both boats attempt to gain a range and bearing count on the other to fire off torpedoes/decoys with passive sonars-active is only ever used by SSNs for obvious reasons.

In these situations certain types of active sonar may be used for this purpose at the risk of revealing the location of your own boat (but with SSNs not so much risk).

Sir, sorry if I'm being naive, but can you please elaborate as to how SSNs are not that risk-prone? Further, what are these "obvious reasons"?

 

[Jliu]

Sir, sorry if I'm being naive, but can you please elaborate as to how SSNs are not that risk-prone? Further, what are these "obvious reasons"?

SSNs have an inherent advantage over SSKs in that they are larger (in displacement) and as a result may fit more and/or larger sensors in their hull as well as being much faster than SSKs. As the general range of torpedoes are known a SSN may use active sonar at stand-off ranges to deduce the range and bearing of an SSK out of range of the SSK's torpedoes to generate a firing solution on the SSK. Now the 'obvious reason' lies in the use of active because when you use an active sonar you give away your own position in return for the position of the OPFOR boat. The use of passive sonars (bow, flank, towed array) to "sound out" OPFOR boats is standard practice esp SSN v SSN as most passive sonars/sensors are especially advanced given advances in processing power of computers esp with the advent of Commercial Off The Shelf (COTS) tech allowing submarines to be retrofitted. Which is why the procurement of an Akula II SSN by the IN alters the strategic naval balance of the Subcontinent and gives the IN much increased flexibility and firepower since the platform is far superior to anything in the PN/PLAN inventories.

 

[vish]

SSNs have an inherent advantage over SSKs in that they are larger (in displacement) and as a result may fit more and/or larger sensors in their hull as well as being much faster than SSKs. As the general range of torpedoes are known a SSN may use active sonar at stand-off ranges to deduce the range and bearing of an SSK out of range of the SSK's torpedoes to generate a firing solution on the SSK. Now the 'obvious reason' lies in the use of active because when you use an active sonar you give away your own position in return for the position of the OPFOR boat. The use of passive sonars (bow, flank, towed array) to "sound out" OPFOR boats is standard practice esp SSN v SSN as most passive sonars/sensors are especially advanced given advances in processing power of computers esp with the advent of Commercial Off The Shelf (COTS) tech allowing submarines to be retrofitted. Which is why the procurement of an Akula II SSN by the IN alters the strategic naval balance of the Subcontinent and gives the IN much increased flexibility and firepower since the platform is far superior to anything in the PN/PLAN inventories.

Thank you sir... Regards.

 

[Alienware]

" ...while conventionals utlise preplanned ambush positions due to inferior sonar power and speed compared to SSNs but comparitively higher "stealth"... "

I don't necessarily agree that SSKs are more silent ("stealth") than SSNs. This myth largely came about during the time when the latest SSNs in service with the US Navy were the Los Angeles-class (first built in 1972) and in service with the Royal Navy were the Trafalgar-class (first built in 1977). Decades later, Germany and other European nations had started to commission new classes of SSKs - now naturally they were going to be more silent than the older SSNs of the US Navy and Royal Navy, simply due to advances in technology. The Hyperbole surrounding SSKs was just a case of timing and circumstance, nothing more. Now with ultra modern Virginia and Astule-class SSNs entering service with the US Navy and Royal Navy, the myth of the "more silent SSKs" has largely ended - yet it is still a popular misguided belief held by many.

SSNs continue to set the standards in all aspects of submarine warfare. Fact.

The US Navy, Royal Navy and Russian Navy have been harassing each-other and perfecting tactics in the North Sea and the Atlantic for decades! The Submarine warfare doctrines held by each of these navies are second to none.