A tutorial on how to make magic with MS paint would be amazing.

Thank you!

@@HISuttonCovertShores hello mr.sutton. Could you please give an insight on the recent seawolf class underwater collision by the uss connecticut in the south china sea? I know I sound silly but do these collisions reveal any acoustic information or secrets that could be deduced due to said accidents.

Submarine, depth of understanding.... I detected what you did there, friend :)

@@rhystillo 😊

Badum tiss

Thanks!

Stop mutilating babies

@@Tadesan Will make sure to listen to your advice ...thank you

The US as far as I know is already building one Columbia class submarine that they replace the Ohio-class with eventually.

@@neues3691 Oh, missed it then. Good to hear, as the Ohios are not spring chickens anymore

Russia also develops new gen sub - Hasky class which is rumoured to have both attack and ballistic variants

The Brits are building their lead ship of the Dreadnought-class SSBN ( HMS Dreadnought I presume ) , the Americans also are also working on the Columbia-class SSBN , which is said to be heavily based on the British Dreadnought .

By the way , The Chinese are very special in this regard The Chinese have a tremendously rapid-growing technological base in submarine-related areas ( compared to for example air defense , missile , aviation ( except for combat aviation engines ) , land forces and surface combatants in which the PLA has achieved maturity ) and hence after each series the new achieved technologies vastly date ( or maybe even outdate ) the older , available , currently deployed technologies . Consider that even now they're not fully on par with other nations , especially in nuclear subs . Also the experiences gained , and the mistakes of previous designs considered and the ways and requirements of the future learned , all lead to the development of new generations . Don't get me wrong , some of these technologies may eventually find their way to older hulls in service in modernizations or refits , but mainly the technologies are meant for the future not the past .

Probably is the answer - even if they are only half as good as swedish there is a big problem there.

Pretty much. At the very least they would make it lethal to sail in Taiwan's west and north coast and the Northern Philippine Islands. East coast, i.e. the open ocean, they are not as effective. But its enough to support their invasion plan for Taiwan.

@@ricktoconnor Contrary to popular belief China doesn't need to fight USA on open pacific. If blockaded, they would rather have to open a passage through Malacca straight to the Persian gulf and suez canal. If they engaged Americans on deep sea it would likely be in the Indian Ocean.

@@piotrgrzelak2613 there is no way that china can open up the malacca strait in a war with the US lol

@@leojohn1615 There is no way US can set up this blockade in the first place. Surface ships would be btfo by submarines and air power. Your best chance is commerce raiding by the SSNs from only a few possible bases that are vulnerable themselves. The worst thing by far is the long term prospects. It takes American shipyards years to build a sub, and you have serious recruitment issues. It would be catastrophic for US Navy to engage PLAN because they can actually take losses and replace them.

I tend to use a loose orthographic projection to keep vertical straight up (not angled towards the viewer) so the deck spacings get distorted. I draw them by eye.

@@HISuttonCovertShores Was just curious on what the height would be. (YGBSM if those are drawn by eye.)

I have an answer... kzfaq.info/get/bejne/p72VmpqAqK3bZI0.html

ideally it doesnt matter because target will be destroyed. yes those are noisy and sort of gives away but submarine moves so its not static target and if it turns it narrows down to where ti was but not where it will be in future

Launching from torpedo is stealthier compared to when you launch from VLS and you can move at a faster pace while doing so. That is why Japan skipped on it.

@@miraphycs7377 That's just false. Japan is held back by its occupation constitution drawn up by Douglas McArthur's aides. They were forced to rescind their right to wage war and a range of "offensive" weaponry under an American dictat.

Some submarines, especially diesel electric coastals use "swim-out" electric torpedoes, which don't need a pressurized air "push-out", which is the classic method and yes, it's very loud.

Also, regarding sound of torpedoes, because someone liked my comment and I got reminded about it. Electric motors are quieter, I know earlier Otto-fuel weapons (combustion engine) can be heard by the sound of their engine and not just propeller. In combat its normal that a launched torpedo will only get heard once it approaches the target due to a range of reasons - attacking submarine will try to position itself in a different layer, the dead zone behind the sub not covered by the high performance sonar, etc. But eventually every torpedo will be heard approaching due to the spinning propeller, and towed sonars universally used today.

BOBO ::: AIP sub is no threat. It carries no SLBM, limited range, slow, and can’t remain submerged indefinitely like a nuke sub. And Chinese subs are noisy - easy prey for US Attack subs. When you realize the entire US sub fleet is nuke propulsion, you have to admit you are wrong about AIP.

@@ubermenschen3636 not really. Sure, compared to Western Subs or Korean or Japanese Subs they are noisy but AIP still gives them a lot of capability for staying submerged for a longer time. In the South China Sea, they serve as excellent tools for hunting enemies or for area denial. A sub doesnt have to be nuclear to be effective in a role.

@@ubermenschen3636 For Fraks sake! Do you listen to the channel you are commenting on? kzfaq.info/get/bejne/mZiBhsKSqtm6pas.html

@@ubermenschen3636 This is from AI Sutton as well kzfaq.info/get/bejne/sNWRjKdeuLXSeKM.html

@@ubermenschen3636 I cant post a link to the new North Korean SSB. Go to CSIC KZfaq Video of North Korea's Sinpo Shipyard. High Resolution Images. I cant post this all in one post due to YT rules.

Satellite reconnaissance

Not really. All the 039 family subs have very similar internal layout and maintenance requirements (including basically the same diesel engine), the difference being only the AIP and some bits and bobs outside. The 093 and 094 are basically the same ship, with the difference being the SLBM module plopped in the middle. This is also why some 093s have been seen with the Chinese UVLS installed where the SLBM section is found in 094. The one and only Han has only sailed out once in the past three years, and the Mings are mostly just used training recruits. Realistically, China only operates 2 and a half sub classes. The rest are experimentals.

@@andrewsuryali8540 That makes sense. I had heard that their navy was afraid to go out to sea in them and that there was fear in diving them. But I saw a recent video about the geographical constraints that the Chinese navy has. It seems to me that the Chinese have a threefold problem: experience, geography, and partnership. Their navy would be a nuisance in a conflict, but little else.

​@@dwilson284 Their NAVY is still the largest in the world and can probably sink every ship entering their control zone BECAUSE of the geographical limitations and sheer number of missiles alone. Their SUB FLEET is almost totally useless. Two different things. The way the geographical wall of allies works is just like any other wall. You can hold the enemy at bay on the other side of that wall as long as you stay on your own side. However, any ally stuck on the other side of the wall is screwed.

@@andrewsuryali8540 The navy would be limited and suffer a high casualty rate very early on in a conflict. Ships are all about controlling a battle space, but artillery from shore does not have the same inventory constraints that ships and aircraft have. Satellite imagery and human intelligence will give plenty of advance warning to limit the navy's mobility with explosive effects. Submarine warfare would probably be the best early-conflict option for China.

@@dwilson284 Not a problem if they have a couple of mln of college students graduating per year in stem major.

Many decades ago, theUS Navy had made the study comparing pro and cons of nuke versus non-nuke sub - apparently, you didn’t get the memo. You can see the conclusion of that study: the entire US sub fleet is nuke.

@@ubermenschen3636 Huh, technology and the global threat environment must have stood still since then.

Unlimited range and speed is why the U.S. Navy chose nuclear over conventional subs and they will keep on doing it even if its costly. Ask why China is making nuclear submarines even if the technology in conventional subs has improved.

@@deltaboy2011 There is a case to be made to use them to defend strategic choke points in littoral sea-lanes where forward basing is possible. I'm not a real advocate either way. I think it would be interesting to hear both arguments given the H I Sutton treatment.

@@ajbridgewater Every country has their own philosophy on what type of subs they want whether conventional or nuclear. For example, Japan only needs conventional subs to defend their homeland close to home and no need for them to go afar.

I cover the pros and cons of X-form rudders here kzfaq.info/get/bejne/p72VmpqAqK3bZI0.html

i think amur was sort of export only submarine. one submarine with many sub classes since for domestic use they are making lada class...possibly one class after lada too since lada was not so good apparently and they still use improved kilo anyway. also with better batteries AIP might soon be obsolete

Biggest advantage of lada/amur is its conformal sonar suite. Why would Russians want to just sell the tech to China, I'm not sure. If they bought several boats, sure. But there's really nothing to cooperate on. Second and third lada boats are being finished after their project changed mid-production. Boats 4 and 5 were ordered, which tells me the r&d is finalized.

And saying that a state or a corporation "is prideful, instead of thinking about profits" is a braindead take. Guarding from industrial espionage is actually crucial in securing export orders.

That was never a plan to my knowledge. Shallow water like the bohai sea would be a pretty bad place to hide an ssbn. All of the jin class are stationed on Hainan Island and would hang out in relatively deeper south China sea.

Why would it be a mistake? Nonsense.

Try YJ-21 hyper missile and air-launched DF-17 and then come back to comment in here.

Trust an American nerd to chest thump