Display:
Where's Pierre?
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Mon Feb 16th, 2009 at 06:37:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I'm here. It's remarkably easy to do actually, with modern submarines which basically make no noise at all.

It was a in bad weather, huge waves (Golfe de Gascogne), and the dirty little secret about super smart detection/weaponry gizmos, whether airborne, submarine, you-name-it, is just: they only work on a quiet, sunny, midsummer morning.

Both subs would be cruising at 600m depth, because that's the maximum they can, and deeper is stealthier. No need to invoke coincidence for the depth match, it's a design thing, all recent boomers cruise a 600m, full stop.

Both subs would be cruising at 4 knots (arguably a ridiculously low speed, but absolutely silent, and that's what boomers are for), which greatly limits the potential for damage. As for why the Vanguard had to be towed, I can only speculate one reason: it was hit by the rear, and it damaged a rudder.

The Triomphant, with just a big chunk of fiber glass blasted, lost basically no capability save torpedo launching (and this is probably the greatest risk we came close to: an idle torpedo in a launch tube could have gone off and blasted the sub from the inside, exactly kursk-style, but actually a dozen such incidents in western navies over the past 50 years never triggered any torpedo, only russian torpedoes are seriously dodgy).

Could the crews have prevented the collision ? If they were not on particular alert, not picking anything is the most likely outcome. And if any did, the procedures in place would not actually help, because they are designed on the idea that a collision course is very unlikely during an encounter. Procedures would be: make no move, because any rudder move could have you detected, make even less noise, and grab the best audio signature you can for the navy's database. If the signal is weak (likely), it takes longer to determine that it is a collision course, than for the collision to happen...

The most likely outcome, aside from the embarrassment and the bill, is that NATO countries will start "boxing" the boomers just like hunter-killers, and share the box data. Boomers will probably have much larger boxes, like 1000-NMI wide, overlapping with hunter boxes (boomers have always known about the hunter boxes to avoid them except for planned exercise). NATO countries only total about 22 boomers, so 15 at sea at any time, two thirds of them US now stationned only on the Pacific, so this should be pretty easy and not involve any loss in deterrence capability and independence (that is, for France versus the anglo, there is no independence of the UK vs the US).


Pierre

by Pierre on Tue Feb 17th, 2009 at 10:36:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]
What are the constraints on the subs' 2-D movement? Is there a lot of sea they don't use?
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Tue Feb 17th, 2009 at 10:40:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]
They have no limits on 2D movements, on the long run.

Noise constraints dictate that unless they have a clear emergency (like a torpedo fired at them), they move real slow, turn real slow (like: take 50 nmi to make a U turn), and move real tricky (like: you don't actually make a U turn, you make an elaborate movement which looks like you change you mind six times in the process, with five different speeds all along, just in case someone was listening, the reason being that if you make a simple geometrical trajectory and someone hypothesises it, he can infer from the doppler data on your noise spectrum, all you spectrum characteristics - know exact speed, so get to the original unshifted frequencies in your spectrum, etc, etc...)

This is usually sumed up by "fart slow". Very boring also. The only place with some action on board a boomer, is the collection of porn tapes in the mess.

So regarding the present fuck-up, the answer is: save a detection of torpedo launch, or a very clear signal of constant angle (unlikely in bad weather from such subs), the doctrine was to keep listening whatever anyone had heard (or not), while globally going straight forward, so if the encounter was by change on a collision course in 2D, it was a goner from the start. No more complicated than that.

Pierre

by Pierre on Tue Feb 17th, 2009 at 10:59:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, I meant are they able to patrol the whole Atlantic are or are there preferred features they want to be near?
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Tue Feb 17th, 2009 at 11:03:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]
They want to be:
  • within range to shoot moscow (that's still a huge swath of cold water if you check in google earth)
  • far from trading routes (easy in the north)
  • far from fishing zones (a bit harder, but still leaves lots of water)
  • far from coasts with ports (traffic is dangerous and shallow waters), but close to desert coasts if the shelf has a steep slope and these are your own waters and they are large enough (because a HK would have to violate those waters to stalk you, but as I said, Shetlands are not enough, the russians could conceivably nuke them all)


Pierre
by Pierre on Tue Feb 17th, 2009 at 11:08:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]
That's a pretty big area. Running into each other is pretty impressive.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Tue Feb 17th, 2009 at 11:13:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I'm sure it should be relatively easy to calculate how regularly this should happen with ocean volumes and  subs distance of travel.

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Tue Feb 17th, 2009 at 11:27:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]
quick back of envelope calculation gives a rough figure of one colision every 23,000 years per submarine.

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Tue Feb 17th, 2009 at 01:51:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]
What we need is the number of collision on any pair of submarines, considering the number of submarines of two navies in the patrol areas.

When you say 1/23000 yrs, that would be with one sub each ? or for one given sub with two subs per navy ? then it's 1-(1-1/23k)^4 for all four subs ?

Pierre

by Pierre on Tue Feb 17th, 2009 at 03:12:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]
My question would be how many are actually patrolling in the same area? I assume the Russian ones are all in the relative safety of the arctic ocean.The US ones in the Pacific and Western Arctic. So the only ones that can reasonably run into each other would be the UK and French ones (possibly the Chinese and US in the pacific)wether you'd say  how many could collide would be down to how far the lengths of their patrols overlap, and so how many you'd actually have at sea at any one time.

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Tue Feb 17th, 2009 at 03:51:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]
That's the idea behind my 2+2 assumption (see other post in same thread with another calculation). 2 for each navies, on patrol zone + transit lanes, at any given time.

US boomers are all in the pacific now. russians are in the arctic along their own coastline. the chinese have only one 20-yrs old boomer, and there are so many us hk stalking it when it sets sails, that its position may be leaking to google placemarks near real time nowadays. This incident could only ever happen between france and uk in the present setup of strategic forces.

Pierre

by Pierre on Tue Feb 17th, 2009 at 05:13:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Well actually, they were not on patrol, much more likely in transit between home port and patrol zone (certain for Triomphant, likely for Vanguard).

Now the following computation:
average speed: 4knots = 4 nmi/hour ~ 7.5 km/hour
effective "collision" section = 20 meters (ship breadth, all @600m depth)
area combing speed: 0.15 sq km / hour, or over 3 sq km / day.

Total patrol area in the north atlantic + transit lanes = a few million sq km. Lets say there are constantly about 4 boomers in there (only boomers count, they dodge their own HK because they know where they are). That's two boomers of a different country for each boomer of first country (let's forget non existent russians, and assume boomers of one country are more or less boxed).

What is the average time between intercepts considering the entire fleet of 4 subs ? (we assume even if they detect the encounter, they don't deviate from current trajectory)

Pierre

by Pierre on Tue Feb 17th, 2009 at 12:09:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]
about 3x(3 sq km/day)/3e6 sq km = 3e-6 th part of the area is scanned each day by 3 subs, but there are 4 such combinations, so more like 1e-5/day. I assume subs change course randomly from day to day, and they can randomly go back to some place they've been a while earlier, so each day is an independent random experiment, subs collide if some combination of them do scan the same area.

I get to about 100 000 days on average between collisions, which is 273 years. Not such a large number, but still, it comes a bit early when such patrols have been going on since "only" 40 years. Now, of course a little bit of "lets veer just a little bit toward this weird noise so we get a clearer signal" might help a lot in bringing the numbers down (boomers are not supposed to do this, but you know, it gets so boring down there...)


Pierre

by Pierre on Tue Feb 17th, 2009 at 12:19:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Recommended Diaries
Clipping the wings of a judge
by Migeru - Feb 10
6 comments

Hunger March wins PR battle
by DoDo - Feb 9
2 comments

Romania: protests change government
by DoDo - Feb 8
6 comments

Murdoch - Outsourcing and Hubris
by ceebs - Feb 3
18 comments

Obama wins GOP Primaries (to date)
by Frank Schnittger - Feb 8
8 comments

Bristol Pound
by ChrisCook - Feb 7
14 comments

Strange Fruit
by Frank Schnittger - Feb 4
14 comments

The Imitation Of Germany
by afew - Feb 4
31 comments

Recent Diaries
Sarkozy: Enemies Ahoy!
by afew - Feb 10

Clipping the wings of a judge
by Migeru - Feb 10
6 comments

LQD: Unsustainable irrigation
by Melanchthon - Feb 9

Hunger March wins PR battle
by DoDo - Feb 9
2 comments

Obama wins GOP Primaries (to date)
by Frank Schnittger - Feb 8
8 comments

Romania: protests change government
by DoDo - Feb 8
6 comments

Answers to the Renewable Energy Consultation
by Luis de Sousa - Feb 7

Bristol Pound
by ChrisCook - Feb 7
14 comments

The Imitation Of Germany
by afew - Feb 4
31 comments

Strange Fruit
by Frank Schnittger - Feb 4
14 comments

Murdoch - Outsourcing and Hubris
by ceebs - Feb 3
18 comments

Mismatch with the Natural Gas Market
by Luis de Sousa - Feb 3
22 comments

The Future of Economics
by ARGeezer - Feb 2
191 comments

Desert Island Discs - Helen's distortions
by Helen - Jan 31
48 comments

Gorila
by DoDo - Jan 29
14 comments

Rail News Blogging #7
by DoDo - Jan 29
15 comments

Obama's State Of The Union: LQD
by Crazy Horse - Jan 25
74 comments

Democracy Technology
by gmoke - Jan 24
1 comment

The Hydrogen dream
by Luis de Sousa - Jan 24
49 comments

ET Paris Meet-Up 2012 (2 UPDATE)
by afew - Jan 23
113 comments

More Diaries...
Occasional Series