New German and Norwegian Type-212CD
Vložit
- čas přidán 11. 09. 2024
- #Type212 #Norway #Germany
📫 Contact Gene Dayhaw gene@solaromgmt.com for paid promotion.
🤩 twitch.tv/subbrief
😎 Patreon ► patreon.com/subbrief
🏴☠️► SubBrief.com
💣The WarZone ► thedrive.com/author/aaron-amick
🤐 Hire ► Aaron linkedin.com/in/aaron-amick-9538a4171/
📸 Instagram ► subbrief
😃 Facebook ► Sub-Brief-100400978417964
📡 Reddit ► reddit.com/r/SubBrief/
🔞Twitter ► SubBrief
🔥 / subbrief
🎧Aaron's Audiobooks ►audible.com/search?keywords=uss+nautilus
📫 Contact Aaron ► Aaron@subbrief.com
Aaron's PC Spec
------------------------
CPU: Intel i9-9900k @4.7 GHz
RAM: 32GB
GPU: NVIDIA TITAN RTX 24GB GDDR6
Accelsior 4M2 16.0TB PCIe M.2 NVMe SSD
sub brief
subbrief
cold waters
cold waters 2021
aaron amick
sonar
sonarman
sme
subject matter expert
navy
naval
games
news
history
It has been brought to my attention the Hobart-class AWD destroyer has a Mk41 VLS launcher and does not need modification to launch Tomahawks. Thank you for informing me. I believe we have one of these most educated communities on CZcams. You are great!
Also known as a quickly going to to wikipedia and then smashing the keys on the keyboard as quickly as possible to prove you wrong even though they haven't watched the full video yet. Welcome to youtube Kappa.
In all seriousness, not trying to generalize everyone that comments in the comment section and I appreciate the streams, podcasts and subbriefs you produce, I had a blast watching today's stream and not regretting my membership on patreon for one second. Keep on hunting!
Hey Aaron, I wanted to ask you a question: What is your opinion on Epic Mod stealing Dot Mod assets, and how will this affect whether you play Epic Mod again?
Awesome. I always wanted an All-Wheel Drive submarine.
The 212CD will be armed with NSM Block 1A, that can hit both sea and land targets
We have a GREAT teacher.
The idea for the special tomahawk missile to take out power lines etc, came from an accident that happened during war games off of San Diego back in the 80’s. Some of the jets participating in the war games were shooting off chaff. High winds that were happening during that time blew the chaff back over land and caused a bunch of blown transformers and a good portion of San Diego was without power. The Navy paid a bunch of money for repairs but some bright individual saw that if chaff could accidentally cause this kind of damage, what would a purpose built weapon that specifically targeted power plants do?
A Retro emp lol
A cruise missile with a large graphite warhead would be an interesting weapon
Then they made it and deployed them in the Gulf war
The British attack Germany with balloons that had trailing wires that would short circuit power lines. Operation Outward.
The new german 212cd can focus on stealth against active sonar because they have perfected every kind of passive stealth. With the 212a being the fist submarine with Hydrogen fuel cell AIP that has no moving parts whatsoever, there is nothing left to be made quieter going into the 2nd generation. Now the enemy sonar was the last thing to be shut down.
The Norwegian admiral wants eight of the submarines but the politicians gave four 212CD, it was criticized by the opposition for being too few subs to operate and to replace the six older subs, now there have been elections and a new government has promised to increase to six 212CD, they will also operate in deep water around the Barents Sea.
Its crazy, they have money to buy not 8, but 16 of those subs, why only 4...
@@simonsimonovic4478 the Norwegian Armed Forces plans to buy more frigates coast guard ships and restructuring of command center as well as increase manpower, in addition there is major adaptation of the new f-35 aircraft and Boeing P-8 Poseidon, + land army undergoing upgrades, all this is included in a long-term plan to strengthen combat capability, the previous government made a money package that was too small and amputated in relation to admiral staff's wishes and was criticized for being a reduced combat force, the previous government had spent an incredible amount of money on everything other than defense so funding was poor. and yes Norway has money in funds but we must follow the trade rule in order not to create inflation and economic crash.
@@ofoten7054
Norway has only 23 000 active millitary, for country with 385 000 KM / 2, it is too small.
@@simonsimonovic4478 Yes possibly but remember warfare has changed a lot since the Cold War, today it is high tech and a soldier must be more highly educated and commitment for many years since it takes longer to educate and train soldiers, firepower rapid movements communication and information has evolved tremendously since the Cold War when everyone had to serve in the military.
@@ofoten7054
Yes, I agree.
But if you have such a large territory, you need a slightly larger army. Look at Finland, it has a large reserve force.
Also, sometimes recruits who are 19-22 years old will fight better than a professional soldier of 35 years. Sometimes it is good to combine a professional army and a recruitment system
Germans always been revolutionary in sub design, like Elektroboot in WWII and then the diamond shaped hull on the 212CD.
Do not forget about Italy which in WW2 produced many submarines and even good ones, not to mention the 3 prototypes of the Italian submarines SA1, SA2 and SA3 which had the first closed circuit engine with stealth capability.
Yes, we're proud of our U-Boot tradition.
Hobart Class already has a MK41 VLS. They do not need any physical modification to carry Tomahawks.
Unless its a strike lenght Mk 41. Or else it can't mount Tomahawks.
@Mark Sullivan Materially inaccurate because the Hobart class embarks a 48 cell Mk41 not a 64 cell Mk41. The option for a 64 cell was only available if Australia chose the modified scale down variant of the Arelight Burke Flight 2 offered. The Hobart based on the Navatia F100 hull have not the physical surface deck space & internal volume space to accomodate a 64 cell Mk41. Nor has it the reserve bouyancy capacity to do so. Ipso facto once the Australian chose the cheaper & less technically demanding Spanish design to built. It was locked into a 48 cell Mk41 confrigulation, upgrade to accomodate a 64 cell was not possible. When the design choice was being made in 2007, the Americans denied Australia the right to procure the Tomahawk missile only the British RN was permitted to field the Tomahawk. The Aussie wanted it but were told there not gonna get it, then.
Also the Hobart does not field any advanced BMD capacity BMD 5 & above. The Hobart does not field SM-6 which may have some capacity against hypersonic missile & is also capable of ultra long range shoots in the beyond 200 mile range class. It does not field any of the SM-3 which gives it a decent shot against ballastic missiles, SM-3 block II A gives it some limited effective anti ICBM missile capability. The Hobart has not received baseline 8, 9 or 10 updates/upgrades.
It is not comparable to any Arelight burke flight 2 or flight 3 class nor any of the Jap Ageis equipped nor any of the RoK Korean Ageis equipped warships. Actually of Ageis equipped ship in the Indo Pacific its the least capable. It however maybe somewhat more capable then Areligh Burke Flight 1 & Tricondegaro class that are within the next 2 or 3 or 4 years gonna be decomissioned.
@@kevinyaucheekin1319 in 2024 they will be progressively upgraded to aegis baseline 9 and will be equiped with sm6,sm2 block 3c, essm block 2 and have either the lrasm or naval strike missile. Hopefully the anti ship missiles will be contanerised like the current harpoon armament so it will not take up space in the mk41 vls
@@kevinyaucheekin1319 Hobart Class has strike length Mk 41s
Hobarts have 48 cells so they can carry 8x Tomahawks, 8x anti sub VLA's, 4x SM-3, 18x SM2, 40x ESSM's in quad packs and a Drop Bear in a gum tree and 8 Harpoons in quad launcher on the deck.
It is a shame Norway gets only 4 of these submarines. Norway has the fourth longest coastline in the world, and an economy mostly based on what our coast provides of wealth. We used to 15 submarines. Let's hope the 212CD would carry the NSM missile and SAMs.
If I have learned something from watching Aron play cold waters is that if they add VLS to the design, it becomes a whole different beast when attacking a surface fleet or launching cruise missiles
Well the German ones at least will be equipped with IDAS for Defence against aerial threats and small ships/land targets. I would hope for a tube launched version of the NSM as well. I don’t think they’re going to go for a VLS. That would take up too much space needed for the liquid oxygen tanks used for the AIP
@@maxt9657 yeah, probably would require extending the sub even more and making it slower, I'm just saying that the capability vls provides would make them punch way above their weight class
@@maxt9657 IDAS again land target must mean a very small target indeed. VLS on 212s would probably mean a much bigger boat. Possibly so large it should have a reactor.
@@sebastianguerraty6413 it is a nice capability to have especially if you want to attack land targets or large surface formations (like carrier strike groups). But I suspect that these submarines are build to counter Russian submarines in the Norwegian Sea. It is unlikely that the Russian will try to break out into the Atlantic with a surface fleet. Furthermore they could support British and American nuclear submarines in the GIUK gap. All in all I think they won’t come with a vls system. Perhaps they’re going to have more tubes than the 212a which has 6. so maybe 8 for a more varied loadout
The a good way to get your head around stealth shaping is to consider a massive room with no lights, all surfaces painted matt black, and in the middle of that room is a shape hanging from a cord, with a mirrored surface, first consider a sphere.
Now imagine you are the radar/sonar transmitter and receiver, imagine you have one of those head torches on, so that the illuminated area is where ever you're looking, now look towards the sphere, you will always see a small reflection, because there's always a patch of its surface at 90 degrees to you.
Now imagine a cube, there's only 6 relative positions where you'll get a return, you'll get a big return, but in any position other than those six you'll get very very little.
Now, if you paint that object matt black aswell, you've just applied radar absorbing paint and made it really stealthy.
We in Canada purchased four (4) conventional submarines from Britian back in the 1990s ... they have been "lemons" ever since ... poor choice ... we are now looking into purchasing twelve (12) new conventional submarines.
Why we ( Germany, Norway ) must tell some military stuff to USA? USA also tell nothing to us…..
b/c both countries of yours is vassal state of USA,🙄
This is manifestly false. Germany and Norway have gotten tons of military equipment from US over the years including training. Norway is acquiring f35 and has f16. Germany has access to most U.S. tech such as patriot. Many missiles are from U.S. like Air to air, patriots, GMLRs, etc. Germany can have access to most tech from U.S. if it wants to buy, but just chooses to make most of their own weapons to support jobs in their country.
Regarding RN vs USN subs, the way it was explained to me is that the chine around the bow of British boats splits the water in a way that helps it flow over the hull more quietly. Apparently for USN boats that tend to operate at higher speeds there's more benefit to having that very hydrodynamically optimised hull with a long length-beam ratio and bullet shaped bow.
a lot is to do with the type/shape of the mainframe sonar
I liked your comments about the Brits; You should have told us, we are friends! Yeah, likewise, one might say. 🥴 As a Norwegian, I am pleased with these boats. They will provide us with good defensive capabilities. Good solid German engineering.
Absolute world first game changer! Being the first submarine to have the ability to take out anti submarine helicopters and or even planes. The hunted become the hunters.
That new shape has got to be a simple structure over the pressure hull, like the turtleback on a Trident.
Does give you some extra space outside the pressure hull for things like the AIP tanks, or external torpedo/countermeasures tubes.
With modern computer graphics cards, it should be possible to predict your signature and what your threat angles are _in real time_
Originally I thought TKMS might not have good chance in the Dutch submarine bid (Walrus replacement) since 212 is not large enough. Now with the much larger 212CD, the story is totally different.
I believe the Dutch ar buying a version of the 212cd
CD stands for "common design". Also, the type 212a are dual hull subs, so will be the 212cd class.
maybe 1,5 hull design at best.
@@jebise1126 the 212a are dual hull, they have the internal pressure hull and the external sonar absorband hull wich holds also the fuel tanks etc for the AIP System etc
@@zhufortheimpaler4041 it seems only upper part is dual hull so 1,5 hull
@@jebise1126 look at crossections, it has an internal pressure hull and an external hull for sonar absorbtion, streamlining etc.
its a double hull ship
@@zhufortheimpaler4041 i didnt and i only saw one hull... do you have any other source that i didnt saw?
Sub Brief,how about a comparison of electric vs nuclear, covering cost, noise, maintenance etc. All around bang for your buck. I think if your not fighting half way around the world, staying in your own back yard, that modern electric boats are pretty practical.
The U.K. has been working on nuclear electric for quite a while. Instead of steam turbines. The reactor would supply steam for the generators which would power electric motors.
That type 212 sub is what Australia really needs rather then the nucs because it is small and only requires 30 crew. Way more suitable for our small navy and the shallow seas they patrol then the nuclear subs being proposed.
Nuke subs are more noisy also..
The problem is that a submarine with the size of the U212-CD have not enough range for a very large country like Australia. It cannot reach Perth from Adelaide, or transit far and fast.
@@geoffreya375 Even the regular german Type 212A can dive from Europe to the US without surfacing. They can maneuver underwater for 3 weeks. This new version Type 212CD will have even more AIP range.
Nuc subs are also very noisy.
They're a little small compared to the Collins, which can be an indicator as to required capability and future expansion of those capabilities. I think the size helps with future proofing a little, if you get me. Imo the proposed Type 216 sounded pretty good, or the Japanese Soryu if we're talking conventional subs. I have mixed feelings on nuclear sub capability... I think there's advantages to developing local nuclear infrastructure, but if we end up having to buy an interim class for the Collins, the cost is gonna be even more revolting...
Was in the German Navy, dont want to hunt one of those.
great Video, greetings from Germany 👍🖖😎
0:47 this also was my first idea about that shape. I'm a simple engineer, no stealth expert, but what she says sounds credible.
Pretty sure the US knew about the design just didn't see it being important enough to change the status quo.
Probably, I just like to go down tangents.
They know everything, but can't do anything. A very interesting situation.
@@alielabdimarras7965 There's a lot of things "known" but action isn't taken due to lack of interest/money/technology available. Look at the flying wing design. It was known about all the way back in WW2, but it didn't really become a true operational product until the B2.
@@shadow7037932 And theorized even before WW II in XXth century, and I'm not sure if Leonardo Da Vinci or similar individual mused about something like this.
The Hobart class are modified spanish F-105 frigates, so they have a Mk41 VLS like the spaniards.
The munitions that were used to cause damage to the power grid by shorting out power lines were loaded with either graphite or carbon filaments depending on type of munition that was used in desert storm
The hobart class being based on the navantia f100 class frigate is equiped with mk41 vls cells, they could just remove a couple of their AA dedicated missiles to accommodate the tomahawk if they are using the strike length version of the launcher (since that was one of the designs for the constellation class proposal, I believe the cells they have are strike length, or at least some of them)
No need to add new launchers on the ship if they are willing to give up some of the SM or ESSM missiles they are using for AAW (it is based on a frigate design, so they don't have anywhere near the amount of vls as a burke class of ship would have, but maybe dont need as many depending on the mission)
Also no one has mentioned who is going to be responsible for the nuclear waste disposal for the sub program, the UK still has some of their first gen SSNs waiting for proper long term disposal, its going to be a major sticking point for whoever commits to housing the reactor and spent fuel long term.
Or just buy Korean KDX-III monster of design.
212CD is literally a brand new submarine comparing the original 212A, It's become so big!
I would assume its a development of the Type 218, which was like a super long 212 built for Singapore? It does certainly feel like a quite different submarine.
We could "re-skin" existing subs fairly easily... we might lose a couple knots though. I dub this shape polygon pear!
Well... finnaly they will build that Type XXIX H submatine 😂😂😂
Indeed the overall concept might be from 1944, at least in spirit. XXIX H had the wedge shape on the sides, it was called K shape.
Its crazy what designs they have come up with in WW2. A lot of that stuff is still valid...crazy
@@2fat4airborne44 they got scary motivation... design or die more or less.
"the new hotness" must be American slang, but I like it lol
I just saw that France is recalling its ambassador to Australia over the subs. Talk about overreacting. If they don't want any country to place any substantial military orders with them again they are going about it the right way lol
@@robertgriffin6668 They'll bomb us with baguettes!
You are not thinking straight. A breach of contract by a country towards another, and an ally on top of that, means a breach of trust. Basically, this means nobody can trust the word and signature of Australia; this will have extremely serious consequences for Australia in the long run as trust is something you earn over a long period of time. This will also have consequences for the US but much less because the US is powerful, not so Australia. And for the navy, this is a disaster: it seems you do not understand what the initial contract was for, and what cancelling it means. Australia had no experience in building submarines, hence the French contract which meant a massive technology transfer effort (80% of the contract was for Australian companies...). A large part of the delays were linked to the time needed to train Australian engineers and companies, not to design (the Barracuda class is already being built!). Now on top of this the US will need to transfer technologies in the nuclear power plant maintenance and operation: this means at least 10 years delay, Australia will not have nuclear submarine they can operate before 2045 at best, and the cost will dramatically escalate. The US is a clear winner in terms of foreign policy and military strategy, but Australia will be the looser in that deal.
@@robertgriffin6668 What sort of ridiculous answer is that ? the issue here is not Australia strengthening its military alliance with the US, it is a breach of contract and of trust with an ally.
@@fredericsgard8067 France was warned multiple times that their delays and cost overruns were unacceptable to us given the pace of events in the Indo-Pacific. Our PM went to France to relay this to Macron personally. We were personally assured the situation would be rectified. It was not. There is the fundamental breach of trust. We wanted you to succeed. Do you really think Australia would have abandoned the French subs if we were satisfied with the progress? The elements of training and technology transfer you mention were all there in the contract France accepted. They were not "favours." I am familiar enough with contract laws, penalties for breach of contract etc. France will get billions on top of the billions it has already been paid for delivering nothing. But no country in the world will risk its fundamental security for a contract. It is also not true that Australia has no experience in building submarines: all the Collins class were built here. But nuke submarines are a different beast and we absolutely cannot do it without US and UK help. We win big time from this improved capability, and so will they because they will get a much more capable ally as well as lots of money.
@@item6931 the Collins class was a disaster with massive delays and increased cost; in top this deal was all about massive tech transfer; the current contract run into so many difficulties with Australian companies that the French had to tell Australia that the first subs had to be built in France to keep the delivery at a reasonable pace; such a massive tech transfer was bound to run into difficulties but that was at the request of the Australian gov. Now with the added difficulty of nuclear propulsion there is no way you will have nuclear subs before 2045, hence the need to lease some subs in between, and the increased cost will be massive. The US certainly won on that deal, but Australia lost the most
The pressure hull is still cylindrical with hemisphere endcaps. The outer hull is stealthy for acoustics and radar (when running on surface). But man, this European AIP SSKs are getting scarier and scarrier. Nukes still have a speed advantage, but a slow sub carrying ultra-fast torps nullifies speed advantage of nuke. But still nuke will always outlast an SSK regardless if its propulsion prime mover.
For coastal defence an electric sub must be alot better and more silent than a nuclear sub?
all german Uboats have a double hull and the outer hull is non metallic so they only changed the non metallic spaced out hull
Kongsberg gruppen is the Norwegian state weapons industry. They like to make a lot locally.
This is a huge game changer! Before the Azzie's would have our backs for sure. But their contribution would have been mostly symbolic, great military but they simply did not have the means to "reach out and touch someone". Nuclear subs and Tomahawks allow them to project their power instead of simply being a coastal defense navy. I sure hope they end up adding vertical launch tubes to the subs for surface to surface capability. Another advantage is they do not have to count on the US as being the worlds policeman.
LOL I talked to my family yesterday about the new SSNs for Australia. It is clearly a part of getting posture up against China.
I wondered what we Germans would do in case of war with China, thinking that our current subs are definitely too short ranged and hard to get into the deployment area..
Here you go. ;)
BTW: I don't think those are pure littoral submarines. Just too big. And our 212s seem to fit the bill for littoral operations (they can operate with 1m/3ft of water under the keel ^^) so we could just build more. I don't know if you know, but we Europeans are growing more and more desillusioned with the USA. First Trump as a complete liability in foreign affairs (from our standpoint) and now Biden just exiting Afghanistan not telling us much in advance. We feel, we need to get our militaries into a state where they can operate more independently from US forces. So these could be blue water subs for that reason as well.
Greetings from Germany :)
@@neues3691 As we are in a discussion anyway on the other thread: what do you want to say?
Typing one word doesn't make any sensible argument, you know?
@@neues3691 No, you just typed a single word in.
Also: You really don't get how grave the situation has become. I recommend you do some research on your own. Recommended documentary (as I assume you understand German): ARTE - "Die neue Welt des Xi Jinping", sums up nicely everything I learned in the years before.
Well THAT was a pretty quick about face for Australia.
There might be some spare French going cheep soon if anyone is interested
Well if the French subs are the same quality as French cars then no thx.....
Depends when/if they get around to building them....
After how the US, Brits and Aussies treated the French in the australian sub deal the Europeans may tell the Americans a whole lot less.
There's a lot of innovative stuff that America that have designed and not told Allies.
Pretty sure he was joking about that (especially since the U.S has known about this since at least the 80’s)
@@willv2746 Did they share the information? Doesn't sound like it.
I suspect USA was aware of this when making the Virginias but didn't use it because it wasn't deemed crucial to focus on active sonar at the expense of other priorities. Afaik the SSN-X will also use a round hull.
perfect for the south China sea, where it's shallow and RAN can have them based at Malaysia, Christmas Island and Port Klang. S C sea too shallow for nuke boats. Australia needs a mixed fleet, nukes and DE
that's a simple upgrade. Just use relatively thin plates to get the shape you want. As an added bonus, you can use the extra volume as ballast tanks for buoyancy. i think if you could see the reflection it would look like a disco ball.
It’s too big for the Baltic and it is intended for blue water operations. Speed is usually not more than 20kts for AIP submarines. That is their disadvantage, however, the modern AIP subs are stealthier than nuclear powered subs.
If necessary and the situation requires it the RN could simply transfer one of it's boats to Australia.
There are no security or operational difficulties in doing that. Just uping the flow of new boats from Barrow would cover that.
Australia would have a boat or two for training and deployment whilst the support or building facilities are constructed.
Very interesting channel. BTW the Hobart class has a Mk 45 5 inch gun and 7,700 tons fully loaded - not a small ship...
Could you perhaps do a segment of the Dolphin and Dolphin 2 classes (which are based on the 212)? Those are very interesting boats...
If the U.S. anti-ship capability is adequate, maybe the philosophy for avoiding the undersea compromises of stealth hulls is "the best defense is a good offense." (Okay for commensurate opposing forces.) Then active sonar would be effective when numbers go up significantly. That's exactly what happens when unmanned smaller vessels and robust distributed systems make it irrelevant that an active pinger has been taken out . . . Welcome to asymmetrical warfare, u-boat style!
This angular stealth shape has first been toyed with with the never completed Type XXIX U-Boat during WW2.
Maybe that is why the British never told you, because you could have known yourself from looking into the blue prints you looted from the Germans after WW2? lol
Thank you for your videos Sir. 27 years US Infantry and still push my nose into business that is not my own LOL. I sure don{t have the expertise you do, but love our boys-girls. Salute friend.
The new spanish S-80 has also this type of design, although not as radical. No more suppositories at Sea!!!🤣
Shapes impact the intensity of reflecting sound waves. Same as electromagnetic waves for airplanes. You are going to see two strategies, the prior was absorbtion which the U.S. has used and will continue to use, and the second is the angles of reflection of sound waves. Arrays of sensors planted on the ocean bottom mostly passive, but not all, in the South China Sea and other places to detect subs both acoustically and magnetically will complicated design considerations further I would think. Oceans are complicated as well by having thermal layers which reflect sonar waves striking them obliquely nearly completely depending upon the angle of incidence. I recall a story from my youth of us using that property to locate downed airmen starting in WW2 by having them drop hollow steel spheres which were designed to crush at a certain depth between layers which would allow triangulation of the location by multiple sensor thousands of miles away.
3:23 never have truer words been spoken
P.S I'm allowed to say that, I live in Germany
During WWII England launched what was basically Barrage balloons which would release cables at a certain point dragging them to short out power lines in German controlled areas. It turned out to be very cost effective, big bang for the buck but they did end up shorting out power grids in one or two neutral countries or countries not on the target list.
I suppose the British ambassador in Sweden was invited by the Swedish cabinet to explain things and verify that the UK wasn't actually attacking Sweden on purpose.
"Don't they know who we are?" Sure they know but why would they tell you. Figure it for yourself. When US created AUKUS with UK and Australia without inform anyone, which results in big deal between France and Australia cancelled, you can figure new sub technologies yourself. France was embarrased and stabbed by US,UK and Australia.
The Hobarts were never fully fitted out with type 41s due to short term vision of the politicians. Space was left and available for additional cells. The Australian PM did say that they were due for a major refit. Another 9 is needed. Hulls made in Spain and fit out in Australia.
Hulls Fabricated in South Australia.
I think it is only dubbel hulled on the bottom surface. Not the whole sub. The stealth shaped bottom is attached to the normal round shaped hull.
asking about german engineering "is it gonna work" - as a german born, i feel that is a thinly veiled insult.
Aside of the fact that german engineers know a thing or two about wavelengts and the caclulations connected to it...
(Heinrich hertz, Karl Ferdinand Braun, Röntgen are just the tip of an iceberg)
...and can do so with an abacus if need be -
i do not think "AI" is a critical requirement to build this. You may know about sonar, but in the engineering department you just failed tbh.
What you may have wanted to say is CAD - yes, in ww2 was no CAD - but engineers at the time where very classy and could work
very well using metrics on a drawing bord. There must have been a reason or two - americans copied german design after ww2.
So dont ask "will it work" - you know it will, they have done enough testing before pouring that kinda money in and announcing it.
It will work, and it will piss the russians off, and it will keep pissing off us-CSGs in wargames. (we have plenty of periscope photos on us-carriers made by german subs, not just a swedish one)
Love your vids, Sub Brief. Thanks.
Speaking of stealth (and as an Australian), I'm really interested in which boat will be chosen to replace the disastrous French project. I think most people assume it will be a Virginia class, but I'm wondering if they're actually targeting an Astute class.
I'm interested in your thoughts on what boat would be the best choice for Australia.
Hi Matt, sorry to butt in (but agree Sub Brief's comments would be of interest here), from what I read it will be the Virginia class in the main, but UK will supply for the fuel. What else I don't know, and I could be way off the mark here. I suspect that the Aussies may want the Astute's Sonar as that is the best bit of kit around (witness 2012 Exercise against USS New Mexico). The builder of subs will be BAE Systems (Australia), which is also building (in Osborne) the Australian Type 26 Destroyer. What do you think Sub Brief?
It'll probably be a Virginia variant, especially given the boats the RAN already have use the ADCAP and Harpoons on the Collins class so they won't need to buy an entire new arsenal to equip them. But I can see an Astute based design having a lot of appeal as they're quite a bit cheaper, smaller and have a reduced crew requirement in comparison to US designs. They're pretty damn capable too and extremely quiet, but the best choice for the RAN is probably the Virginia, they may have to purchase less of them due to cost but the weapons are already there, there's far more available yards in the States (assuming some sections like the reactor will probably be built abroad and sent to Australia for assembly) and they are currently produced at a faster rate.
Uhm, French have basically broken very good design to fit your australian irrational nuclearo-phobia...
@@scottgoode2609 I believe the intent is to build in Australia under the guidance of the designer. This is part political, and part an intention to ensure a domestic capability.
@@harrysheffield624 I believe BAE is the builder of the Astutes in the UK. So the ability to export the expertise to build by BAE's Australian entity makes a whole lot of sense.
Never thought stealth application used on aircraft can be used on submarine.
They should have bought the A26 👍🏻
Wow getting the Tomahawk is huge. That increases their attack range to well over a thousand km and attacks surface ships if they get the block 5 version, doesn't it? Methinks the harpoon is not long for this world considering it's not much cheaper correct?
Lots of interesting stuff. On the first segment, the one with the new boats for Germany I wonder if the outer, stealth hull would be vented to allow seawater to fill a void between the inner and outer hulls. This way the cylindrical, inner hulll would be the one bearing the pressure.
Yeah the 212a already have double hulls with the outer beeing free flood so your guess is likely correct
@@mkaymkay2846 Thanks!
That's funny that the tomahawk had wires to short electrical grids. The brits did the same thing to the Germans in WW2 with balloons.
Norway getting 6 subs now.
Will be I testing to compare the CD and the NFS versions of the type 212. This joint version between the Germans and Italians split into 2 different branches, one developed without intervention from the other partner.
Every time I hear about those AUZ Hobart destroyers all I can think of is a a fleet of industrial kitchen equipment.
"... this is Morrision the Prime Minister of Australia..." or as the head yank calls him "that fella down under". The new Hunter class figates (we're getting 11 I think) also have MK41 VLS - I think 32 cell off the top of my head. I believe both the Hunter FFGs and the Hobrt DDGs actually have AEGIS - remember AEGIS is the combat system, not the actual radar. The radar is a separate thing - US AEGIS equipp[ed vessels use the SPY-1 radar, but Ausatralia is using a locally designed and built radar, from a company started by two ex RAN officers. I think the Hobart class DDGs have the SPY-1
I think there's also work going on with sharing some of the CEAFAR radar technology with the United States, if I remember correctly. It's supposed to be a hell of a radar.
The 212C/D has 8 vertical launch tubes.india will put 8 brahmos in the tube.
Well the North Sea and the Baltic Sea (in which German subs are/were supposed to operate primarily) aren't very deep, so a non-optimal pressure hull shouldn't be as much as a problem as for Russian and US submarines that operate in the Atlantic and Pacific Ocean.
The designation CD stands for Common Design. Based on the intention to agree on a design which suits Norway and Germany.
9:45
Not so much the Baltic as further north in the case of Norway.
Remember, Norway shares a border with Russia, both on land and sea.
Germany dont need the Tomahawk, we have also the Taurus!
No conventional Power, Hydrogen. The most silence ever
Germany designed it's first stealth subs in 1944.
That shape seen from the front reminds me of the RAH-66 Comanche helicopter that was also supported to be stealthy but ended up cancelled.
The diamond hull could also be effective deflecting active sonar from torpedo's
Salt water engine is powered by cavitation bubbles. Sonarman's dream.
No,Norwegians are not cheap.They are a small country with a limited defense budget as well as a limited number of sailors to man ships.Yes,the British shared their Astute-class design with us.Electric Boat in Groton,CT helped them design it.
Think the maintanance problem of the type 2012A is only a german problem. The german navy ordered no spare parts. Every time there is problem they have to call the industry. Don't think Israel, Norway and other customers have the same problem.
A dock worker posted a picture of the 212cd propeller on social media.
Rounded shapes are not stealthy, everybody had figured that out long ago, even the Army, it's very obvious with aircraft cockpit glazing - rounded glass produces sun glare at a very broad angle range, that's why they tend to make flat glazing in combat helicopters, for example. I guess the US Navy didn't need that feature nor it wanted to build the required double-hulled design..
The copper wire to hit power lines - the UK did this in WW2 with balloons floated over from the UK on the wind into occupied and German territory.
The shape may well be more stealthy against sonar. However, it's shape may well cause more water turbulence, thus increasing noise
Looks like the same principle the F-117 uses to redirect radar away from the emitter
Israel supposedly has a contact with HDW for a new class of boat, to be delivered before 2030-ish. I wonder whether Israel will end up with the first export-version type 212CD. If the 212CD is the boat that Israel has been rumored to purchase, it will be extremely interesting to see whether it's just another torpedo-launched cruise missile boat, or has VLS capability.
Probably like their current dolphin class maybe a bit better with electronics
@@georgen7467 Probably, but if Israel has secretly developed a ballistic missile program, the global balance of power would be significantly altered in favor of the West.
@@thefreeaccount0 the dolphin class current and the 3 new ones (probably) have 4 650mm torpedo tubes that can launch cruise missiles
@@georgen7467 True, but they can't launch ballistic missiles.
Maybe it’s the 216 that was offered to Australia but declined in favour of the French design that has now been kicked out again
Just because the information is on the internet doesn't mean it's declassified I saw a lot of stuff that was classified on the internet but I still couldn't confirm nor deny it's authenticity
They didn’t tell you because you would just rip them off and sell it to the Aussies behind their back… ;)
"nobody told us" i guess lockheed did, but whos counting.
RAN is a shrinking Navy and the F100 has 186 personnel and the Arleigh Burkes require 303-323 crew. So we can have 3 Hobarts with 3 x 5 inch guns and 144 VLS or 1 Arleigh Burke with 1 x 5 inch gun and 96 VLS. Australia can't just measure a purchase by dollar cost. It also has to factor in crewing cost with our small navy that tries to appear large. Also we have never fought a war by ourselves ever. We have only ever been at war alongside Britain or the US and so force projection is not the aim of our Navy. The aim of our armed forces is to prevent being invaded and to assist our allies.
Then why are you buying large nuclear submarines that can only operate in blue waters far from shore? 10 ultra-modern stealth fighter submarines to fend off an invasion before it happens would be more important in my opinion.
@@callsigndd9ls897 We won't be getting those nuclear subs. This will be overturned and was just scott morrison being stupid. We don't have the manufacturing capability any more and certainly don't have the crewing to operate either the virginia or astute.
Passive "stealth" so to speak, that's why our Astute's have a multi facet hull.
This is a really old discovery. Like, before the F117 was made.
If there is an internal, second, hull it won't be as much bigger than the earlier one as the overall hull dimensions might lead you to believe.
Hobart Destroyers have a 1 × Mark 45 (Mod 4) 5-inch gun (wiki) forward. Not a 76mm or anything else.
Dr Pauling? And yes I think you've touched on Radar to Sonar planform alignment in regard to the new X planes. Good stuff.
Do you have a guess about the submerged duration capability of these new littoral stealth subs?
3 to 4 weeks without surfacing. But it is nonsense to assume that the 212 class subs who can only operate near the coast. They have a range of 8,000 nautical miles. These subs operate in NATO Missions constantly also in the Atlantic or the Mediterranean.
4 subs for Norway. That’s about 1 sub per 25,000km of coastline. No, that’s not an exaggeration, that’s the real figure.
Germany’s 3 subs is one per 1200km of coast.
Question for Sub Brief:
What do you think the SSN(X) submarine will look like?
A.) Shape
B.) Performance/Armament
anechoic coatings dont have to compress if they are open cell.
They're not open cell.
a stupid question. if the incoming signal is not reflected back in the direction, doesn't the enemy see a hole? A negative image, so to speak?
We don’t tell you things because you steal them and sell them as your own and cut us out afterwards ( we remember the manhattan project ! )
These subs are going to be stealthy insofar as they aren't moving or going straight slowly. If they try turning the amount of vortices the shape is going to create won't be small. And, of course they are compromising on top speed and fuel efficiency.
Aviation Week covered the Tomahawk well when they were introduced. There's also a discussion about our ships being to small with limited weapons and reloads