Submarines

DJMacdonald wrote:

Dilandu wrote:
Well, i can't recall any large surface warship, build with diesel since 1950th.

US Navy Newport class Landing Ship, Tank (LST). Main propulsion: six (6) Allison 16 cylinder turbocharged diesel engines.

.

Ok, my mistake... If we assume that the LST is a type of warships.

I don't think a LST will do 36 kt's.

6L6 wrote:I don't think a LST will do 36 kt's.

About 24 with all the laundry hung out, sailing downhill, and with a good tail wind.

But when did speed alone define a warship?

.

Dilandu wrote:Ok, my mistake... If we assume that the LST is a type of warships.

It certainly was when I served onboard one. I realize there existed (and still does) a biased mind-set that believes only the grey-hounds of the sea are real warships (destroyers, cruisers, battleships, and dreadnaughts), but power-projection is one of the real markers of a professional Navy, and nothing says power projection quite like landing a Marine Expeditionary Force on someone's shoreline.

.

Speed can be a matter of life or death.


Duncan wrote:
I don't think a LST will do 36 kt's.


About 24 with all the laundry hung out, sailing downhill, and with a good tail wind.

But when did speed alone define a warship?

.
-- Duncan

iranuke wrote:First things first. The submarine is what is used by the weaker sea power to try and even the odds. Charis IS the major sea power at this time. Charis does not need to work on subs, the Temple boys do. Diesel driven PT boats are also a force multiplier used by the weaker side, again something for the Temple boys, not Charis. Now, Torpedo Boat Destroyers to take on the small fry from Desnair, etc.

Does this mean that the US had the weaker navy in WWII then and ever since? The US Navy has had submarines as a standard part of its defensive and offensive capabilities ever since WWII. As has the USSR and now Russia, China, Japan, India and Europe/EU. Subs are not something that just 'weaker' sea powers use, but strong sea powers as well. There's some things that subs can do that surface ships cannot and vise versa.

Apples and Oranges.

The Missile and Attack subs of post-WW2 were much different than any subs that can be produced on Safehold at the current time.

Now one of the roles used in the Pacific by US subs was commerce raiding and Charis's foes already have forces able to do that without subs.

Zakharra wrote:

iranuke wrote:First things first. The submarine is what is used by the weaker sea power to try and even the odds. Charis IS the major sea power at this time. Charis does not need to work on subs, the Temple boys do. Diesel driven PT boats are also a force multiplier used by the weaker side, again something for the Temple boys, not Charis. Now, Torpedo Boat Destroyers to take on the small fry from Desnair, etc.

Does this mean that the US had the weaker navy in WWII then and ever since? The US Navy has had submarines as a standard part of its defensive and offensive capabilities ever since WWII. As has the USSR and now Russia, China, Japan, India and Europe/EU. Subs are not something that just 'weaker' sea powers use, but strong sea powers as well. There's some things that subs can do that surface ships cannot and vise versa.

Zakharra wrote:
Does this mean that the US had the weaker navy in WWII then and ever since? The US Navy has had submarines as a standard part of its defensive and offensive capabilities ever since WWII. As has the USSR and now Russia, China, Japan, India and Europe/EU. Subs are not something that just 'weaker' sea powers use, but strong sea powers as well. There's some things that subs can do that surface ships cannot and vise versa.

More correctly would be to say that the submarines usually more dangerous to the stronger sea power than to the weaker.

During a conversation on the russian alternate history society, was determined, that:

- It is possible to build a sea-capable submarine in current Charisian conditions;

- For underwater propulsion she would use the Stirling engine on liquid fuel

- The engine would work with the onboard supply of liquid oxygen in large Dewar flasks (yeah, it's dangerous, but the early XX century accumulator batteries was almost as much dangerous)

- At the shallow depths, the sub can use snorkel, to save the liquid oxygen supply for dives

- On surface, the steam engine or turbine (or diesel) may be effective

- For the reconaissance, the submarine may use a towed paraglider, that would allow her to locate the enemy ships before they would be able to locate the sub, and dive in time to engage them

- There is no principal problem with torpedoes; hovewer, the pneumatic dynamite guns may be more effective for attack against unarmed transports.

Dilandu wrote: SNIPP
- There is no principal problem with torpedoes; hovewer, the pneumatic dynamite guns may be more effective for attack against unarmed transports.

As in any rapidly advancing technology there are discoveries and inventions that appear to be sound ideas but later fail to fulfil their promise. The American navy developed two unusual ships during the 1880s. Lieutenant Edmund Zalinski, U.S. Army, invented a gun that fired guncotton-loaded shells. Guncotton, nitrocellulose or dynamite offered destructive force greatly exceeding conventional charges. Unfortunately these explosives could be detonated with a sharp impact. The "dynamite gun" used compressed air to propel projectiles smoothly out of the weapon's bore. It eliminated the explosive impact of conventional propellants on shock-sensitive ammunition.

In 1886 Congress appropriated $350,000 to build a"dynamite-gun cruiser." Cramp's shipyard in Philadelphia fulfilled the contract. Christened Vesuvius, the vessel was an early prototype of a "weapons system" in which armament and its delivery system were inseparable. Vesuvius' top speed was over twenty-one knots. She lacked armor. The vessel's structure supported and fixed the pneumatic tubes used for propelling dynamite shells so that the gunner's aimed by pointing the vessel at the target. Gunners changed range, which varied from five hundred to two thousand yards, by adjusting the duration of the high pressure air blasts used to eject the shell.

Vesuvius was popular with the public but not with the navy. The lack of armor made her a "sitting duck" vulnerable to small caliber fire. She did find use during the bombardment of Santiago, Cuba during the Spanish-American war. During the day she would remain concealed behind the blockading battleships. At night she would lob blindly aimed dynamite projectiles at the Spanish fleet in the harbor. Most of these made awesome craters in the surrounding hills but did little real damage. Naval personnel belittled her popular reputation as a terrible secret weapon and the government planned to convert her to a torpedo boat.

Another "concept-ship" design reverted to the naval warfare practices of the Roman Empire. The Kitahdin was an armored ram designed to cut through any warship afloat. Naval officers questioned the utility of ram type vessels but proponents managed to get Congress to authorize construction. The Kitahdin looked like a submarine and ran with decks awash when in fighting trim. A massive cast-steel stem backed up with large timbers and covered with two to six inches of armor plate formed the ram. The Bath Iron Works launched Kitahdin in 1895 but her trial speed of 16.1 knots was one knot short of the contract speed and the Navy could not accept her.

Theoretically, Kitahdin could not run at seventeen knots with engines "of any horsepower that could be put in her" according to the Navy board. Congress passed a special bill in 1896 to authorize her acceptance. Working aboard her was probably the most miserable job in the navy. Ventilation was poor and the interior of the hull dripped condensation incessantly. Below deck temperatures exceeded 110° F and heat in the boiler room prevented stokers from shoveling coal for more than a few minutes. In moderate seas most of her ports had to be sealed and she ran "half-seas under, " according to her commander, George Wilde. Plans called for her to participate in harbor defense during the Spanish-American War. Instead her orders sent her to supplement the blockading fleet off Santiago. She arrived after the American Navy's decisive battle victory there.

The navy decommissioned Kitahdin and sunk her as a gunnery target in 1909. Her greatest contribution was in developing the technology for building submarines and reinforced bows.

Source: "The American Steel Navy", John D. Alden, Naval Institute Press, 1972.