Nuclear attack sub challenge
Page 1 of 7

Author:  Colosseum [ March 10th, 2019, 12:16 am ]
Post subject:  Nuclear attack sub challenge

The next challenge is here. This time we will be drawing nuclear attack submarines, from any era.

Specific requirements as follows:

Requirements (all dates below are guidelines, not rigid requirements):

- Attack submarine
- Nuclear-powered
- Any timeframe, provided nuclear power for submarines is available -- or your AU setting explains why it's viable ;)
- Focus of the design must be "attack"; no ballistic missile subs or cruise missile subs
- Any navy (AU, real, or otherwise)

This is another open-ended SB challenge. Submit a nuclear-powered attack submarine from any country or AU, from any era. Designs can range from the prototypes like USS Nautilus to the ultra-modern Virginia-class SSNs. No ballistic missile or cruise missile-focused subs should be submitted. Drawings in this challenge should be classed by the USN as "SSN" only. There is no limit on "when" the drawing is shown; just make sure nuclear power is viable for your submarine/navy/country during the period shown. If you're drawing an AU submarine outside the usual date range for nuclear power, you should explain why nuclear power for your submarine is viable during the date specified. Feel free to show as many versions of the submarine throughout its service life, provided it remains an "attack sub". Submit your drawing with or without a text block accompanying it.


Length of challenge & judging categories:

This challenge will run until 23:59:59 UTC April 8. Entries submitted after 23:59:59 UTC on April 8 will be disqualified.

Drawings will be scored via Google Forms poll, with five categories that will be totaled to determine the winner. The poll will close 23:59:59 UTC on April 14. Categories are as follows, with 10 points available in each:

- Adherence to SB style - does your drawing follow the SB style rules as defined in the Style Guide? Is it readily recognizable as a Shipbucket drawing?
- Drawing quality - how well executed is your drawing? Is it super detailed, or does it have large blank spaces that draw the eye? Does it use the most current and accurate SB components? Does it use the best and most realistic color scheme? Is it shaded correctly and is the shading consistent?
- Design realism/feasibility - is your design realistic? Does it make sense given the parameters we have defined? If it's an AU drawing, how well does the ship fit into the AU itself?
- Originality of drawing - how much of the entry is the author's own work? Is it a kitbashed drawing, or is it primarily their own work?
- Suitability of design - how suitable is the design to the requirements posed in the challenge? Does the submission fulfill the requirements?

Note: this time, the poll will not allow commentary. Reviewers are encouraged to leave a post in this thread once polling begins with their commentary for each drawing.


Challenge rules:

- One entry per person.
- Multiple versions of your entry are allowed, provided they show the same ship's evolution over time.
- Multiple views of your drawing are encouraged but not required.
- Text blocks with stats, history, etc are allowed but not required.
- Springsharp stat blocks are allowed but not required.
- Discussion of Springsharp is not allowed in this thread.
- Posts that are off topic in this thread will be deleted.



Since this is a very open-ended challenge, we have lots to choose from. Look to all the major navies that operate nuclear attack submarines: USA, Britain, Russia, France, etc.

Good luck everyone and happy drawing!

Author:  thegrumpykestrel [ March 18th, 2019, 10:48 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Nuclear attack sub challenge

Okay, well let's see if I can get the ball rolling then. Like last time, this is sort of an au of an au

Australasian Nuclear Submarine Program

Beginning in the 1970s, a debate had begun to emerge in Australasian naval circles in regard to the future submarine designs and roles. Both Australia and Westralia had been operating diesel-electric submarines for the past decade and a half, and whilst these SSKs were considered highly effective in the roles assigned them, especially in littoral ISR, the limitations of conventional power were becoming obvious. Whilst Australia's Oberon's did possess an impressive range, most of it was on the surface, and Westralia's new Type 209s weren't much better. Given that range requirements were possibly the most important for both nations, both independently began to investigate the possibility of utilising nuclear power in a future class of submarine.

As research and concepts began to overlap between the two countries, a decision was soon reached to jointly pursue the creation of an Australasian Nuclear Submarine Force, with Australia and Westralia colloborating on introducing the necessary infrastructure, design and manufacture industries for the new force. Australia would spearhead the effort into creating a sustainable nuclear industry to support the creation of the submarines, whilst Westralia would handle the program from the naval design aspect. It was agreed that the vessels would be designed in Westralia (with international assistance from France and the UK) and significant components produced there, whilst final manufacture would occur in Australia. This was subject to change with the differing needs of either countries wider economic desires and requirements, however the overall program would remain a joint effort of roughly equal input. Whilst this suggested a single class of ships for both countries, this wouldn't necessarily be the case.

Despite a decision being reached in the early 1980s to acquire nuclear submarines as part of joint effort, it was expected to take roughly 30 years before any SSN actually came into service, given the need to setting up an entire nuclear industry from scratch and allowing it to mature to the point that it was a considered safe enough, cost effective enough and reliable enough to be turned to the manufacture of submarines. For Australia, this presented a slight problem, as they would require an interim class of submarines in the near future to replace the rapidly aging Oberon's. This became the Collins-class SSG, which started to enter service in the 1990s. With Australia focused on refining the flawed design they had just entered into service, the burden of introducing into service the new class of SSN fell to Westralia, with Australia estimated to follow more than a decade after.

Whilst rigorous design exercises had been undertaken for the majority of the 1980s and early 1990s, the Westralian designers only began to actually work on the new SSN design in the mid-90s, under the marketing name 'Sawfish'. By 2000, work on the Westralian variant of the design was nearing completion, and this was closely followed by the official placement of four orders, with the new subs to be named the Spectre class. Construction began in 2005, with an estimated completion date of the first submarine in 2010. However, significant delays bugged the project, and it rapidly became the most expensive defence program Westralia had participated in. It was not until 2011 that the first submarine was launched, and another 3 years until it was commissioned. However, it was immediately apparent that this new class of submarines was a game changer for the RWN, and wider Asia-Pacific region, despite some typical niggling issues associated with entering a new class into service.

The submarines were a complete step-change over the old and worn out Type 209s. The new sonar, dubbed 'Kookaburra' and built by Thales, drawing from the RN's Type 2076 in their Astute-class, was an unprecedented increase in performance over the old sets in the Type 209. Furthermore, heavy automation meant that, despite being larger and more complex than the prior class of SSK, it did not require a drastic increase in submarine trained personnel, with the class actually requiring roughly the same crew as the smaller Collins-class SSG. A fully digital command and control system helped enable this, but also allowed new methods and manners of utilising information and intelligence, making the submarines highly situation-aware and extremely lethal. Armament was more conventional, but still very effective, with a mix of Mk 48 and Kingfisher missiles allowing the class to ably deal with submerged and surface targets, including on land.

[ img ]

Length: 84m
Displacement: 4700-5300 t
Speed: 30+ kts, submerged
Range: unlimited, 90 days supplies
Complement: 55
Sonar: Thales 'Kookaburra', derived from Thales MCA and Type 2076
Armament: 30 x Mk48 ADCAP Mod 7 (CBASS), Sub-Kingfisher mixed

Whilst the RWN and RAN were collaborating on the submarine design, they did not expect to purchase the exact same design, given slightly different operational requirements. However, an entirely clean-sheet design for the RAN was deemed too expensive for the bi-national partnership, meaning that the Australian submarines would be an evolution of the 'Sawfish' design, the variation being dubbed 'Swordfish'. The subs were to incorporate design improvements suggested from the RWN's operation of the Spectre class, along with those needed to fit Australia's specific needs. The chief difference came in an extended hull, from the need to be compatible with a Dry Deck Shelter in support of special forces operations, something seen as less important for the Westralian variant (though the provision to utilise one was technically present, the shorter hull made the Spectre class less suitable). Furthermore, the sail was redesigned to improve hydrodynamic flow, and the bow received a minor re-profile in shape. Finally, an updated sonar suite, dubbed 'Kookaburra 2', was to be installed. Construction started in 2018, with the first enter service in 2025 following the planned retirement of the first Collins class submarine. Twelve vessels in all are to be constructed, forming the Attack class. Some of the changes made to the design are being considered to be implemented by the RWN for their submarines.

[ img ]

Length: 92m
Displacement: 5000-5600 t
Speed: 28+ kts
Range: Unlimited, 90 days supplies
Complement: 60
Sonar: Thales 'Kookaburra 2'
Armament: 30 x Mk48 ADCAP (CBASS), Sub-Kingfisher

Author:  MitcheLL300 [ March 21st, 2019, 9:00 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Nuclear attack sub challenge


Look like a neat little sub!
But can you explain to me the 2nd row of missiles/torps what is that?
Looks like a holder for the armament and splits open when used?

Author:  heuhen [ March 21st, 2019, 1:21 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Nuclear attack sub challenge

MitcheLL300 wrote: *

Look like a neat little sub!
But can you explain to me the 2nd row of missiles/torps what is that?
Looks like a holder for the armament and splits open when used?
looks like Kongsberg Submarine-NSM version, similar idea:
[ img ]

Author:  thegrumpykestrel [ March 21st, 2019, 1:51 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Nuclear attack sub challenge

Yeah, basically a torpedo-tube launched asm

Author:  Jim1the1Squid [ March 21st, 2019, 6:44 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Nuclear attack sub challenge

I would much like to enter in this challenge, but I don't know what to use or how to upload ships/subs to this website. :?

Author:  Jim1the1Squid [ March 21st, 2019, 6:46 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Nuclear attack sub challenge

I would very much like to enter in this, but I don't know how to upload creations. I have a lot of them done on paper, but I don't have any resources to make them online.

Author:  1143M [ March 22nd, 2019, 3:26 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Nuclear attack sub challenge

[ img ]

Author:  MihoshiK [ March 22nd, 2019, 9:40 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Nuclear attack sub challenge

Jim1the1Squid wrote: *
I would very much like to enter in this, but I don't know how to upload creations. I have a lot of them done on paper, but I don't have any resources to make them online.
You can upload any images you have to, it's free and quite easy to use. Some people get quite far using MS Paint as their image creating software, but any freely available image software like GIMP will usually be better.

Good luck, and we hope to hear more from you!

Author:  sebu [ March 23rd, 2019, 10:29 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Nuclear attack sub challenge

Since the ESPR has been developed more quiet and sophisticated subs, Scandinavian Union is forced to respond with that thread. (see the map)
The first SU SSNs were developed by Saab Kockums and delivered to Norwegian and Finnish navies between 2019-2024.
Despite the high price of these (1,8 billion US$/vessel) total 5 vessels were ordered ( 2 for Norway, 3 for Finland). Money is not the problem, since there are total of 20+ trillion US$ reserve of gas and oil in Barents and Norwegian Sea area. (see the map...)
These are equipped with a mini-sub; either connected with mother vessel (2 LW torpedoes) or as SEAL delivery.
Unique feature of these are the rescue pods. (Edited...)

[ img ]
Edited the size and location of rescue pods
[ img ]

Page 1 of 7 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited