Rethinking Undersea Warfare: The Case for U.S. Navy Diesel Submarines

[rangerrebew]

 
Rethinking Undersea Warfare: The Case for U.S. Navy Diesel Submarines
Story by Jade Harper • now
At the cusp of a new era of maritime conflict, the U.S. Navy stands at a crossroads, confronted with a dilemma of how to maintain undersea dominance while juggling fiscal constraints and rapid strategic changes.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/rethinking-undersea-warfare-the-case-for-u-s-navy-diesel-submarines/ss-BB1mpQA3?ocid=msedgntp&pc=HCTS&cvid=c2fc6b6bff3541aca0bf42cca050d33f&ei=11

[PeteS in CA]

Yawwwwwwn. This nuclear vs. diesel-electric debate has been going on since the 1970s that I can remember. The USN went nuclear because of superior endurance - years or decades before refueling is necessary, and no batteries needing recharging - not because the technology is cool.

[AL]

Those old "sewer pipe" subs were an easy target for surface ships.

[PeteS in CA]

Modern SSKs are far better than WW2-vintage Balao or Tench class (or earlier) boats, but they still need to recharge batteries, and they still need to refuel vastly more often than an SSN or SSBN. SSKs are probably OK if your area of concern is just the Baltic, Black, or, maybe, North and Mediterranean Seas. But if your area of concern is the Atlantic Ocean or all the world's oceans, SSKs aren't up to snuff.