In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

Comments

  • discusdaddiscusdad Member Posts: 11,427 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    and its electric/diesel technology
  • ChrisInTempeChrisInTempe Member Posts: 15,562
    edited November -1
    Looks small for short range and coastal defense. Which is fine if that's all they need.

    Compare to the USA subs having to traverse the entire planet. Calls for a much larger sub.
  • discusdaddiscusdad Member Posts: 11,427 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    are we working on the technology part that they have in practice now? i've read China has enhanced diesel/electric units. can Iran be next?North Korea also? seems to me the Little Dictators of the world would see this as a huge "get even" low cost alternative to the nuke attack subs especially when used in a small TO.
  • TooBigTooBig Member Posts: 28,559 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    The best the drug cartel and china can buy
  • Rocky RaabRocky Raab Member Posts: 14,496 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    A diesel/electric sub can be scary quiet when it's running on batteries, but there are still ways to detect them. And they can't run on electric indefinitely. They're great for coastal defense, but not so good for blue water missions.
    I may be a bit crazy - but I didn't drive myself.
  • Dads3040Dads3040 Member Posts: 13,552 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I am of Swedish descent, and proud of it.

    With that said, since it is made by Saab, parts will be impossible to get, and tuneups will be frightfully expensive.

    tack s? mycket
  • discusdaddiscusdad Member Posts: 11,427 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    18 days was the submerged time i read. and for IRAN that would be plenty to wage an attack on our fleet in the Arabian Gulf area, and the Straights of Hormuz
  • ChrisInTempeChrisInTempe Member Posts: 15,562
    edited November -1
    On the one hand I'm pleased to see our NATO pals paying for their own defense. Would like to see a lot more of that.

    On the other hand would like to see a lot more of it being purchased from the USA. After all we have poured enormous piles of American tax dollars into defending Europe for a long, long time.

    Consider that the recent case of a NATO air campaign on Libya. They quickly came up short for bombs to drop and were begging the USA for bombs and aircraft. This should have been a proper scandal, as NATO's primary mission is to repel an attack out of Russia. A far more substantial task than dropping bombs on a North African dictator's puny forces.

    Sweden is only building two of these subs and upgrading two older Gotland subs, total of about $1 Billion (SEK8.6 Billion). Compare the specs on these to American attack submarines and you see that we are talking about vastly different classes of hardware. The American subs are from half again to twice the length, up to five times the displaced tonnage and up to six times the crew compliment of the Swedish subs.

    This is the difference between designing for a coastal defense and having to chase Russian ballistic missile submarines deep under an ice cap in order to kill it. The different classes are not comparable.

    I do have to wonder if we have cooperated on these designs to aid the Swedes. The two countries who have done the most development in submarine design are the USA and Russia. So it makes sense that allies of each side would seek design help from their more powerful friends.

    One other thing, there was an incident between the Swedish and German governments over these subs. A German company had bought a controlling interest in the Swedish company. The Swedes did not like the terms and decided to nationalize the technology by force if need be. They sent experts with an armed contingent to the company facilities to seize all confidential and secret materials and remove them from company facilities in Sweden. The German management in turn hurriedly ordered the gates padlocked while the Swedish force was still inside.

    All settled peaceably in the end and to the satisfaction of the Swedish side.

    Thus Tom Cruise will not be making a movie about it.

    So at least we have that going for us.
Sign In or Register to comment.