Quote:
Originally Posted by Icelander
Sonar can handle the detection of biological entities at short ranges, as arrays on fishing ships show, but I'm not sure to what degree unmodified naval submarine sonar arrays are adaptable to such a task.
|
Presumably you're talking about the passive sonar? The hydrophones should work, but the signal processing will be optimised for mechanical, rather than biological, noises. That will reduce detection ranges, which will depend on how much noise the swimmers make. Submarines apparently routinely detect whales and the like, but the sonar team don't report them to the command unless there's some pressing reason to do so. Obviously, different signal-processing software
could be written for the job, but I have no idea if the Brazilian Navy is set up to do that for themselves.
Quote:
|
. . . I don't believe real-world submarines mount any weaponry capable of targeting stealthy swimmers that might only be detected at very close range.
|
They could eject grenades through the signal launcher, decoy launchers, and trash ejector. They could also simply go "all ahead flank". A Type 209 can make 21+ knots underwater, and since they don't seem to use pump-jets, catching living creatures in the propeller suction should result in them being chopped pretty well. Of course, there are easy countermeasures for that.
Quote:
|
Maybe the ability to electrify the hull to prevent sabotage.
|
While completely immersed in a conducting fluid? Seawater is a reasonable conductor, and the charge will simply leak away through the water . . . and probably not preferentially through creatures adapted to life underwater.
Quote:
|
Or underwater firearms mounted on the sub for self-defence.
|
Given the lack of ability to aim, underwater claymores are more like it.