Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Claeren
So you are postive there is not a single model of diesel sub that can go under the ice pack for even a limited duration?
And what about the melting ice pack? Or our ice breakers?
I don't know but i imagine a cost-benefit between the two brings a modern diesel boat out above a nuclear one in all scenarios beyond having a fleet of them and the need for extreme capabilities - neither of which come into play here.
Claeren.
|
The Swede's and Germans use a nifty little system called the non nuclear air independant propulsion system which uses stored liquid oxygen to keep the batteries charged, and it gives a significantly longer range. However the engine plants are fairly bulky and they don't give enough endurance to patrol under the ice caps so they are a non starter.
A diesel submarine can't be used in an artic environment since it can't snorkle through the ice, and a AIP augmented sub cannot carry enough liquid oxygen to patrol under the ice, its nuclear or nothing.
Using an ice breaker has been tried, however they make a lot of noise breaking through the ice and surface vessels have a lot of problems in detecting submerged contacts.
Melting the ice packs is interesting, however I'd hate to have to fill out the environmental impact statements or apologize to the family on the coast whose house is now under a foot of water.
The cost/usage over the life spans of a nuc boat versus a diesel boat is fairly comparible over the life of a sub, and believe it or not a modern nuc boat is easier to maintain then an advanced diesel sub like the Upholder class which Canada bought, you also get the advantages of longer range, quieter performance, greater speed, and a longer life span.
It actually would have made a lot of sense for the Canadian Military to have purchased 6 688 subs back in the Mulrooney era as oppossed to going through the purchase of the Upholders (victoria) class, and the earlier and terrible Oberon class submarines that we continually upgraded since we purchased them in 1967.
The real expense in a 688 program boat is the actual construction, after that the maintainance, upgrading and running of the subs is not out of line with what we're paying now. And since we don't need to build them. . .
Just my two cents.