I wonder, how deep attack nuclear sub can dive?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Chitose
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Nuclear
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the operational depth capabilities of attack nuclear submarines, including their maximum dive depths, the ability to fire torpedoes at such depths, and the endurance of submarines while submerged. Participants explore various aspects of submarine design and operational limitations, touching on both technical specifications and hypothetical scenarios.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether modern attack submarines can truly dive to depths of 1,000 meters, citing a friend's claim.
  • Another participant references a Wikipedia article, stating that the deepest recorded dive is about 1,400 meters, with most torpedoes limited to firing at depths of 400 to 800 meters.
  • A participant mentions that the maximum safe depth for submarines is referred to as 'test depth,' which is classified and not necessarily indicative of safety limits.
  • Some participants speculate that if submarines can dive deeper than 1,000 meters, they may be unable to engage enemy vessels at the same depth due to torpedo limitations.
  • There are discussions about the strategic advantages of deep diving, such as evasion and stealth, rather than direct engagement.
  • Questions arise regarding the operational endurance of submarines, including how long they can remain submerged and the implications of air supply and crew sanity.
  • Participants discuss the fuel life of submarine reactors and the methods used to generate air while submerged, noting that food supply is a limiting factor for long-term operations.
  • Some participants express skepticism about the availability of specific performance specifications due to their classified nature.
  • Anecdotal stories are shared regarding incidents involving submarines and the potential risks of exceeding operational depth limits.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the maximum operational depths of attack submarines, the feasibility of engaging in combat at such depths, and the endurance of submarines while submerged. There is no consensus on these topics, and multiple competing perspectives are present throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the classified nature of many performance specifications for military submarines, which restricts the availability of definitive answers. Additionally, assumptions about operational capabilities and conditions remain unresolved.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to individuals curious about military technology, submarine operations, and the strategic considerations of underwater warfare.

  • #31
After my navy time, I worked on sonar systems, with the guys who did all of the special effects (noises, etc.) for the Hunt for Red October movie.

Chi, thank your father for his service for me (and thank you for living through a fairly difficult family lifestyle)! And of course he's right, they do go faster than that. I've never told anyone, not even my son, any of the specific digits either :smile: we 'bubbleheads' are 'funny' that way :smile:

Abraham, most naval reactors are water cooled and moderated. It's a two loop system. Primary coolant (pressurized fresh water) runs through a heat exchanger (steam boiler) to make steam on the secondary side which is then used for motive force. There were a few liquid metal reactors as experimental prototypes, but only a few.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #32
rolerbe said:
...
Abraham, most naval reactors are water cooled and moderated. It's a two loop system. Primary coolant (pressurized fresh water) runs through a heat exchanger (steam boiler) to make steam on the secondary side which is then used for motive force. There were a few liquid metal reactors as experimental prototypes, but only a few.

I'm 99% sure all US nuclear reactor at sea are of the pressurized water reactor (PWR) type. And you are right we had one reactor at sea for about a year that was cooled by liquid sodium. The S2G was on the USS Seawolf (SSN-575) put to sea April 2 1957. However it was replaced on December 12 1958 because the practical performance of the S2G liquid sodium liquid metal fast reactor (LMFR) never meet the theoretical performance specifications. And a PWR was able to put out similar performance specs without the complexity of the LMFR.
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
615
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
6K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K