It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

U.S. aircraft carrier and part of its escort “sunk” during drills off Florida

page: 4
9
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 28 2015 @ 03:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
I don't know as much about Navy systems, but the Air Force has a number of "Real war use only" systems that are never used in training with foreign aircraft. Not even our closest allies.


You mean something like the ALCM program?

Creepy stuff indeed….




posted on Mar, 28 2015 @ 04:50 PM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

It might be that they're made of brass or another expensive metal and were sold off very quickly.



posted on Mar, 28 2015 @ 05:52 PM
link   
a reply to: orangetom1999

THAT IS THE NR1!!!!!!! Wow! Did not expect to see her on google maps.

And there appears to be a Sturgeon if you zoom in close to the 688's tied up.
To add, if you look at Ask.com maps of Bremerton, Washington they have a different photo, better actually. Not sure if it's older or newer but in that photo there is far to the left of the 688's a boomer. Not sure if it's a ohio or possibly a 640 - 649 class boat. Maybe the kamehameha. Sitting across form her on the same pier looks like the 685, which if true I also didn't expect to see.

Cool.



posted on Mar, 28 2015 @ 11:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: NiZZiM
a reply to: BASSPLYR

It might be that they're made of brass or another expensive metal and were sold off very quickly.


No doubt about them being an expensive metal or metal blend. But the design is very confidential. I do not believe they would be sold off..They would be stored somewhere...covered up in shipment and stored somewhere or scrapped..markings removed..ground off and literally destroyed..cut up and ..melted down. The alloy reused for something else.

Bassplyr,

I do not know for sure that is the NR 1 In the photo. But I have read somewhere and heard from those who served on her that she was decommissioned. She was aging and had been updated several times. Also I don't know how much core life was left in her reactor. Also factored in to whether to keep her running was the cost of refueling verses how much use the rest of the aging submarine would pan out for the costs expended to so maintain/overhaul her. I believe all this was looked and the results came up negative for the monies expended. She is a pretty olde boat.

I have heard that there were a number of changes..updates and add on's in equipment over the years.

I do not believe that is a sturgeon class boat..but one of the boats like the Glenard P. Lipscomb...or whatever class boat that was before the LA class.

Here..you might find this list interesting.

Want to see something interesting...none of the early Virginia class boats have been sent to Norfolk Virginia close to where many of them have been born so to speak. Very interesting.

navysite.de...

They all go to Groton or Pearl. You also hear very little as to how they are working out...almost nothing. Even in the trades. Quite a silence.

I do know this about Pearl and Groton. When you go out to sea...from both Pearl and Groton..you do not go far out of the harbor before it is deep enough to take her down...into the depths and safety ..no shelf..just right into the deep...so to speak..to disappear. Same at Pearl.

Here at Norfolk..you have to go way out miles and miles on the surface to beyond the shelf to take her down to depth and safety.

Just a thought.

Orangetom
edit on 28-3-2015 by orangetom1999 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2015 @ 12:09 PM
link   
a reply to: orangetom1999

I would expect that we don't hear much about the newer subs because they are doing well and also have new capabilities that we want to keep under wraps. Enough new capabilities and equipment that they don't want to risk anybody taking a look at them as the come and go from port.

I have a few things in mind when it comes to new capabilities but this is as far as I'll take my speculations here.

Wonder if they service (the kind that would normally require the yards at Newfolk) the new boats from Groton and Pearl too. If so that could mean they have "stuff" added after they leave Norfolk that they don't even want those guys know about.

Thanks again for your response. You always have something excellent to add to any submarine thread here.



posted on Mar, 30 2015 @ 03:03 PM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

Except for warranty work....most of it of which I know is being done in Navy yards...not where they were built.

Now that I think about it...you also do not hear much about how the Sea wolf boats were working out.

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Mar, 30 2015 @ 05:43 PM
link   
a reply to: orangetom1999

My couch warrior level of speculation says that the Seawolf and the Virginias are far superior to the previous boats with some brand new stuff that takes the ability of the submarine into missions the world would never suspect they are capable of and are doing. Hence they don't let anybody see what they have on them. Plus the Carters wasp waist/dock is very interesting. Wonder if the Virginias and the Seawolf have extended torpedo bays to launch other things besides torpedoes. Interesting other things.



posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 09:44 PM
link   
What all you commie lovers are forgetting is that China uses old Russian subs for the most part. They are not quite, not in the least compared to modern NATO subs and all of the Russian and Chinese subs have been recorded into the U.S. naval computers. If you read this article it also mentions that the battle group was protected by the older LA class attack subs and not the newer Virgina or Sea wolf class attack subs.

Sadly a lot of Politics go into these exercises. You never know what really went down and the French are obviously our partners and know our tactics well. The US navy could have been using Russian tactics to simulate a real enemy situation as well to train the sub in question. Bravo to the French if they just outclassed our battle group however I doubt that we would stick with those in a real war against a former NATO nation. Lord know Obama has fired most of our seasoned commanders who know how to fight well.

A U.S. Carrier can only be sunk by a nuclear torpedo and it might take two at that. That limits the countries who could get that job done. Most nations would have the bulk of their sub fleet in port do to the cost of sailing the and the U.S. would quickly make sure they never make it out of port should hostilities break out between the two.

In a real world situation of a nuclear attack on the U.S. by Russia, France will be the first one to strike back, mainly do to them being closer but our military's have a very close relationship even when the leaders do not sometimes.



posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 10:13 PM
link   
a reply to: orangetom1999

The Seawolf ended up being the Lamborghini of the seas but very costly. The U.S. Navy learned a lot and made it cheaper to come up with the Virgina class boats so Congress would fund the new boats. I wish our air force contractors could figure that one out lol. The scary thing is, they are taking our Ohio class boats and loading them with useless Tomahawks, unzipping our fly even more in the nuclear deterrent field. Subs are very costly and they do not want them to be outdone for a long time, that is why they are so well hidden from prying eyes, never mind they protect thousand of lives on that big, extremely expensive battle group.

The Virgina class is decades ahead in technology over the LA class attack subs. Its faster, can dive way deeper than anything out there with a detection and tracking suite that is simply amazing all the while being very quite. It looks like something out of Star wars circa 2015 inside.



posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 10:32 PM
link   
In reality you would just nuke the entire fleet and every other fleet as well with a barrage of nuclear missiles.
Subs are more accurate and quicker but since you are in WWIII raining nukes works better, makes up for loss of precision and finesse. Makes sure there are no survivors in the battle group. Besides the subs other than hunter killers have a primary mission which, after the battle fleets and air fields and first strike and ICBM silos have all gone up in a nuclear maelstrom, then surface and wipe out all the major cities of the US, Russia, China.
At this point we can wait for a few years for all remaining human life on the planet to come to an end.
So, they sank a carrier, you say?

a reply to: LoveSolMoonDeath


edit on 6-6-2015 by starswift because: edit



posted on Jun, 6 2015 @ 10:39 PM
link   
a reply to: BornAgainAlien

Not so much old diesels, as it is the new ones. You don't have the reactor noises, and other sounds that go along with 'em.

Diesal with anti-echo coatings, and various noise masking tech, they're like holes in the water. Silent and deadly.



posted on Jun, 7 2015 @ 01:04 AM
link   
On the subject of mothballed ships, I got to fly off the Independence. It was a VIP tour I crashed, I impersonated my dad.

i15.photobucket.com...



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 09:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Patriotsrevenge
a reply to: orangetom1999

The Seawolf ended up being the Lamborghini of the seas but very costly. The U.S. Navy learned a lot and made it cheaper to come up with the Virgina class boats so Congress would fund the new boats. I wish our air force contractors could figure that one out lol. The scary thing is, they are taking our Ohio class boats and loading them with useless Tomahawks, unzipping our fly even more in the nuclear deterrent field. Subs are very costly and they do not want them to be outdone for a long time, that is why they are so well hidden from prying eyes, never mind they protect thousand of lives on that big, extremely expensive battle group.

The Virgina class is decades ahead in technology over the LA class attack subs. Its faster, can dive way deeper than anything out there with a detection and tracking suite that is simply amazing all the while being very quite. It looks like something out of Star wars circa 2015 inside.





Patriotsrevenge,

The Seawolfs are indeed a Lamborghini so to speak. However...word through the trades is that they are way to complex with a lot of their new tech which was being pioneered back then when they were being built. Hence they are called by some.."Pier Wolfs." They have to spend a lot of time on the piers before they can be readied for sea. This has happened with high tech aircraft in the past as well. The olde B58 Hustler was like this. To many hours being readied for flight compared to other aircraft. And it gets much worse as they age and the vendors go out of business or get bought out by other companies. This can be told by maintenance records....hours at the piers or hangers verses in the air or out to sea.

At the inflation rates going on..the Virginia's are not cheap as well.

I don't think diving deep is as important today as is being quiet. They made submarines years ago which could dive very very deep. This is not a new thing. The money today is going into quieting features.


The Ohio Class boats with tomahawks are not just tomahawk platforms...they are equipped to handle the Teams through some of their missile tubes. So too are some of the Virginia's...they too are equipped to handle the Teams. Lock out chambers ...even a decompression chamber.

I believe they are also called Dry Deck Shelters to house that little submarine the Teams sometimes carry with them.

en.wikipedia.org...

Certain of the LA class,Virginia Class, Sea Wolf class, and Ohio class boats are modified to accept this Dry Deck Shelter arrangement.

You've been in a Virginia class boat???


The Tomahawk cruise missile has many configurations as to it's warhead/payload. Officially they state that the nuclear capabilities have been deleted...removed. Only conventional types used today.

I do not for one minute believe that this capability has been deleted. It can be reconfigured quickly if need be. In like manner to the way I believe NSA quit spying on the American people because it was in the news media...and they got caught. Riiiiiiiiggggghhhhhtttttt!!!!!






A U.S. Carrier can only be sunk by a nuclear torpedo and it might take two at that. That limits the countries who could get that job done. Most nations would have the bulk of their sub fleet in port do to the cost of sailing the and the U.S. would quickly make sure they never make it out of port should hostilities break out between the two.


You don't need to waste the time trying to sink a US Carrier. You disable it to where it cannot launch or recover aircraft. You can take care of the rest when and if time allows. Think this through carefully with any carrier. A carriers prime directive is launching and recovering aircraft.
If one can stop this function...all there is out there is a barge floating around with useless junk onboard.

A nuclear torpedo...that is not what the submariners on the LA's have told me. Most of the people serving on Aircraft Carriers have no idea how vulnerable they are to a well trained submarine crew...with conventional modern torpedo's.
You need to find out what the advances are in modern chemical explosives used in a modern torpedo and how they work.


Just my 2 cents,
Thanks,
Orangetom
edit on 15-6-2015 by orangetom1999 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 02:30 PM
link   
Patriotsrevenge,


The Virgina class is decades ahead in technology over the LA class attack subs. Its faster, can dive way deeper than anything out there with a detection and tracking suite that is simply amazing all the while being very quite. It looks like something out of Star wars circa 2015 inside.


You should think this through a bit closer as well...about diving deep and being faster..both positions.

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 03:06 PM
link   
a reply to: notmyrealname

What was the TEWS system, the full stealth capabilities on any stealth aircraft, any AN/ALQ system to name a few.



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 04:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: orangetom1999

One of those boats in the pack of sardines ..is not a 688 class boat. You have to look carefully but you can spot it. Bottom row..third from the left.


Looks like the USS Glenard P. Lipscomb (SSN-685)



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 04:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: orangetom1999

You don't need to waste the time trying to sink a US Carrier. You disable it to where it cannot launch or recover aircraft. You can take care of the rest when and if time allows. Think this through carefully with any carrier. A carriers prime directive is launching and recovering aircraft.
If one can stop this function...all there is out there is a barge floating around with useless junk onboard.


A "mission kill" or a "soft kill". I spent a lot of time on carriers in the 80's. One of our officers was working on a paper for one of the correspondence schools that the Navy had. It was on anti-carrier tactics. One of his ideas was to load a cruise missile with bomblets like a Rockeye and have it discharge them over the flight deck, resulting in dozens of craters. The ship had no way to patch the craters and would be out of action, possibly for years.



posted on Jun, 16 2015 @ 12:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: JIMC5499

originally posted by: orangetom1999

One of those boats in the pack of sardines ..is not a 688 class boat. You have to look carefully but you can spot it. Bottom row..third from the left.


Looks like the USS Glenard P. Lipscomb (SSN-685)



I think you are correct in this. From this list. The boat SSN 685 appears to be the sole boat of a singular class between the olde 637 class Sturgeons and the 688 or LA class. To my limited knowledge all the Sturgeons have been scrapped.

navysite.de...



A "mission kill" or a "soft kill". I spent a lot of time on carriers in the 80's. One of our officers was working on a paper for one of the correspondence schools that the Navy had. It was on anti-carrier tactics. One of his ideas was to load a cruise missile with bomblets like a Rockeye and have it discharge them over the flight deck, resulting in dozens of craters. The ship had no way to patch the craters and would be out of action, possibly for years.




For some reason ..so many out here are hell bent on sinking a ship..any ship in warfare.

Unbeknownst to many ...time and resources can become quickly scarce. The resources and time needed to sink a ship can lose one the whole war.

Modern strategy among those who know is to disable and not spend a lot of time sinking/destroying. disable and go around...to the objective...don't get bogged down. You can sink them later when and if time and resources allow...or not if you so choose.

This was also John Boyd's strategy in his OODA loop...energy maneuvering. Don't go right up the middle to heavy loss of materials and personnel..but go for the objective. Use other resources to take care of this kind of stuff but without getting bogged down and away from the objective.

This was amply demonstrated in the desert wars..by the speed of events. I have every reason to think that modern Naval Warfare would be as rapid and dynamic.

I don't believe there has been a massive naval Dreadnought slug out..since WW2 and then only one or two of such events.

Air power changed that dynamic forever as well as the speed of events.

Some of the strategy which has come out of this is fascinating..due to advancements in thinking and technology.

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Jun, 16 2015 @ 11:10 PM
link   
The biggest problem is the US ASW fleet has one hand chained behind there backs and can not use there high power ASW sonars except during war because it kills whales.
en.wikipedia.org...




top topics



 
9
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join