Underwater battles are so rare in history, despite the huge numbers of submarines deployed and many nation developing attack subs specifically designed to engage other subs. Why is that?
>>62896432Sometime, subs bump into each other. The Kursk was one of them I think.
>>62896462against what?
>>62896492Well i think the kursk probably bumped into another russian sub, some ground, or some water. Regardless, the front fell off.
>>62896432Subs are stealthy, even to eachother. If a Submarine faces a large surface fleet and doesn't like it's odds it can choose to do nothing or sail away, the surface fleet none the wiser. If a sub sees another submarine it's probably already in torpedo range.
>>62896513funny cause russians still adamantly say the kursk bumped onto an american sub that was shadowing the exercise.
Because we had only two world wars.
>>62896432because first world nations that can afford subs aren't to keen on blowing up each others gazillion dollar weapons and specialists inside them for shits and giggles, i think that's pretty obviouson that note, i'd sell my house and both kidneys to watch two Narco subs fight each other
>>62896432The only countries who can afford subs and be able to use them effectively in a war aren't looking to kill each other yet.
>>62896566you could join the US coast guard and get that every tuesday.
>>62896523And you believe that? If so, why was the US submarine so undamaged? Is russian submarine metallurgy that bad?
>>62896607no of course. the front of the boat blew up like a cartoony candle of dynamite, collisions don't cause that kind of critical damage, but everything is good to get responsibilities off your back, especially when you're in the voenno morskoi flot
>>62896432Lack of opportunity. The first (and so far only) time one submarine sank another while they were both submerged was on February 9th, 1945. Since then there haven't been many wars where both sides even had submarines.
>>62896492The ground. (The practice torpedo that exploded on the Kursk had previously been dropped while being transported and it was actually leaking fuel the day before the exercise)
>>62896432>Underwater battles are so rare in historySays who? My schizo theory (which I believe in solely because it's funny) is that every submarine lost at sea since 1945 was sunk by enemy action and that there's an undeclared war fought between every nation (including ones that are allied) but only underwater.
>>62896432holy fucking shit fuck off back to quora and stop shitting up the boardstop bumping slide threads you retards
>>62896860Oh sorry, i thought this wasn't the ukrainian war board, my bad.
>>62896432Pre USS NAUTILUS subs were pretty shit at hunting other subs-- the acoustical homing torpedo wasn't even introduced until very late in WW2 and even then was just air dropped. Subs were focused entirely on anti-surface warfare so they rarely even approached an enemy submarine and didn't really have good tools for destroying them. Obviously since WW2 there hasn't really been a big naval throw down so all of the advancements which make submarines very dangerous to other submarines have not been used in combat.
>>62897153> the acoustical homing torpedo wasn't even introduced until very late in WW2 and even then was just air dropped. You're referring to the FIDO. The Zaunkönig was a regular tube-launched torpedo.
>>62896623Which is more believable, a adamantium jewish american pig dog sub that is impact proof or vatniggers being retards? This war has shown the latter.
It's a waste of time.
>>62896687>they didn't follow the 5 second rulebaka
>>62897489We've actually seen what kind of impact damage US subs can take. This, plus one that came up right under a ship and completely bent its mast. Steel is great for bending without breaking. Even if part of it gets snapped off, the next section over will just bend without any breaks.
>>62897652Then why did that not happen to the Kursk?
>>62897674Blew up from the inside out, which is the exact reverse of forces a submarine is intended to withstand.
>>62896432Now you know why we won't have space battles either.
>>62896566Wasn't the USN exploring the idea of using narcosubs?
>>62896432Because, given the limitations on building sophisticated attach subs, if two attack subs are fighting each other we're probably at the end of history, or at least what people will refer to as "The time before the great burning".
>>62896566my dream job is captaining one of these things with a ragtag crew of coked out south americans just knife fighting and singing our way to america and freedom in a smoky tube
>>62897674Second explosion was entire combat load of torpedoes going off at once, with total power of about 5 tons of TNT equivalent
>>62899302Still ishttps://youtu.be/cFSyKHOz8gQ
>>62896432>Why is that?Boomers, there hasn't been a war between powers that both have boomers but if there is it'll likely start with attack subs sinking boomers they were tracking before the orders came though.
>>62899302Not exactly narcosubs but basically narcosubs. The technical term is Semi-Submersible and the prototype is the CCH SEALION.https://interestingengineering.com/photo-story/us-navy-stealth-special-ops-boat
