Why no military vessel designs like this...?
Discussion
Why has the semi-submersible design never really been pursued for military vessels?
It's a bit of an open debate this, but I've really seen convincing argument as to why not. The pro's "seem" to outweigh the cons.
For example, if you took a semi submersible twin hull design, and ran it hull down, it would have a massively smaller heat sig and radar x section than say Type 45. Pump out the ballast and run in a hull up config and the speed would be similar to T45.
So what am I missing?
It's a bit of an open debate this, but I've really seen convincing argument as to why not. The pro's "seem" to outweigh the cons.
For example, if you took a semi submersible twin hull design, and ran it hull down, it would have a massively smaller heat sig and radar x section than say Type 45. Pump out the ballast and run in a hull up config and the speed would be similar to T45.
So what am I missing?
That is effectively what early submarines were like - they were surface craft that happened to be able to go underwater for a short period.
A semi-submersible would be a lot more complicated than a traditional ship. You would need some method of trim control, like a submarine. You would massively increase your fuel consumption by running with most of the hull underwater through increased surface area, while not gaining the advantage that a submarine has of avoiding making waves, which takes a lot of energy.
Given the use of modern sensor systems, I don't know whether you would be able to reduce the signature of such a vessel enough to make it worth while.
A semi-submersible would be a lot more complicated than a traditional ship. You would need some method of trim control, like a submarine. You would massively increase your fuel consumption by running with most of the hull underwater through increased surface area, while not gaining the advantage that a submarine has of avoiding making waves, which takes a lot of energy.
Given the use of modern sensor systems, I don't know whether you would be able to reduce the signature of such a vessel enough to make it worth while.
Flintstone said:
Aircraft carriers would be.....interesting though 
Been done, well sort of: http://ahoy.tk-jk.net/macslog/JapaneseSubmarineI-4...Simpo Two said:
Flintstone said:
Aircraft carriers would be.....interesting though
Been done, well sort of: http://ahoy.tk-jk.net/macslog/JapaneseSubmarineI-4...Some of the TAGOS surveillance ships were SWATH hulls (Small Waterplane Twin Hull) which were effectively twin semi-submersible hulls. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/shi...
Edited by andy97 on Wednesday 8th September 06:17
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff