Couldn't ballistic missile subs have been easily tracked?

For a good read on US submarine espionage and tracking of Soviet subs, read, “Blind’s Man Bluff”.

US attack subs would trail the Soviet subs throughout their patrol. Soviet subs were very fast but noisy. The ballistic missile subs (Soviet) would go out with a surface escort actively pinging for US subs to keep them from closely tracking the missile sub. The Soviet “boomer” would then drop off on station under or near the Artic ice cap and just sit there awaiting orders. Without motion - vary had to detect. According to the book, the US attack sub sonar operators would look for a “hole in the ocean” where there were no sealife sounds and that was the boomer’s location. Sealife would avoid the unnatural submarine. If the Soviet sub received launch orders, it would move closer to the surface and this movement (along with other intelligence) would trigger the US attack sub to torpedo the Soviet sub.

Thank you for all the information on what the tactics are.

What is the range of active sonar?

Paging Robby to GQ

IIRC he used to work on an attack boat that would perfom just the type of task the OP is asking about

Except they are too big to traverse the Great Lakes locks and channels.

I also served on a ballistic missile submarine.

Nevertheless, I can’t really comment on the questions raised in this thread.

For security reasons or because my idea is utterly retarded?

The OP mentioned active sonar, dialed up to 11. I think it would be easy-peasy to find a boomer with active sonar from 1000 feet. Rick mentioned that it wouldn’t be easy to get that initial lock, because of the 12-mile restriction on getting near the port.

However, once a sub was found, I’m with the OP in not really understanding why a Soviet destroyer wouldn’t just follow it around the ocean, tracking it with active sonar. Why go to all the trouble of having secret attack subs?

Because the topic being discussed involves classified information.

Oh come on…of course you know classified information, but surely there are some unclassified aspects that you can discuss.

The Soviets had few destroyers. They would rapidly run out of fuel (US subs have years of nuclear fuel aboard). The subs were faster the destroyers. Even with active sonar, it’s still possible to avoid/break detection (temperature/density stratification of water, go under an icepack, pass through a controled waterway, lose them in a surface storm, etc…). Have your fleet chase the destroyer away. Spoof or spoil the sonar signal with decoys. And other ways.

The issue is not dialing your sonar up to 11. Although there are limits as to how much power you can effectively put in the water. The real issue is the speed of sound in the water. You can’t make it go any faster. An active sonar works by sending out a ping and then waiting for that ping to return to the receiver. The further your target, the slower the ping rate. The slower the ping rate, the further behind your course corrections to follow the target and the further away you become. It’s a vicious cycle.

Some of those pieces of paper the gubment makes you sign are kinda scary. Heck, if I was former submariner (or the like) I’d be hestitant to say more than I served, what we ate, and which crew member farted the most (using an alias of course).

No, it’s still in force. However, it’s always open to the parties to agree to modifications or interpretations of the treaty. During the War, the Canadian and US governments agreed to allow armed vessels on the Lakes for the duration.

See: Canada Treaty Information: Rush-Bagot Treaty.

Then allow me to direct any interested parties to Tom Clancy’s Submarine.

I haven’t read it for a while, but I remember it being very detailed. Might pull it off the shelf* and read it again.

  • Where it is positioned directly below Clancy’s Marine.

Excellent book. Read it and you’ll have a whole new respect for those who serve on subs.

Blind Man’s Bluff is another great book about modern subs.
At the time it came out I was working with a former bubblehead that served on the Baton Rouge. When I got to the part in the book where they describe the accident between the BR and the Russian sub I did a little math and realized that my coworker was onboard.
The next day the conversation went like this:
Me: you were driving that day wern’t you
Him: what?
Me: you were driving that day wern’t you?
Him: what?
Me: the sub you were driving that day
(look of comprehension hits his face)
Him: No it wasn’t me, I swear I was in line for chow.
Me: suuuure you were. :slight_smile:

Anyway he borrowed the book read it and came back amazed at how detailed it was and how nobody got in trouble for telling these stories.

Well of course. How do think that collision happened in the first place? :slight_smile:

Well, it’d be dumb anyway, because then people would have a much, much better idea of where the sub was. While you can hide them once they’re under the high seas, it’s hard to keep their construction and launch a secret - indeed, they don’t even try to, it’s a big event - and so if you launched a boomer into Lake Superior everyone would have a pretty good idea where it was. Superior looks pretty big if you try to swim across it but it’s a blip compared to the ocean. I mean, at that point, why build a submarine at all? Just build a missile silo.

Now that makes PERFECT sense.

That’s a load of hoooey.