It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

This was sent to me today.

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in


posted on May, 5 2015 @ 12:35 AM
Not saying it's anything but this came to me and I'm wondering what you all make of it. I've heard of something like this but do any of you know what he's talking about? This is a long time correspondent of mine. After pressing for further details, he simply wanted to push this out and broke communication. I'll try to get more.

I am going to expose you to one of the best kept secrets of the US Navy submarine force; the ability to launch and recover aircraft.

Following WWII, the US Dept. of War decided it needed to study the Japanese tactical theory of a submersible aircraft carrier. The Japanese Navy successfully reached the Oregon coastline with submarine launched aircraft, dropping incendiaries, in attempt to start a firestorm in the dense forest. It failed. Later, sea launched aircraft were supported for a second bombing of Pearl Harbor in 1942 by submarines. It was also unsuccessful.

They then began construction on further submersible aircraft carriers, the largest the world would have known, as part of an operation to shut down the Panama Canal. However the scale of war in the Pacific negated the need for the strike as Tokyo deemed priority elsewhere and the program was cancelled.

Immediately following the war, the US began analyzing the use of aircraft onboard submarines. The attempts were clumsy at first and provided little advantage. It was only when industry was consulted that the notion began to take it’s proper form.

The construction of the USS Grayback (SSG-574) and the Growler (577) ushered in the United State’s modern submersible aviation capacity with the launch and recover of the Regulus UAS. With its intended purpose primarily as a nuclear cruise strike missile, many missed the obvious implication of an air breathing high performance submarine based jet aircraft. Yet it wasn’t lost on everyone. Test’s quickly began under-wraps on autonomously landing the Regulus, as well as recovering with the submarine itself. Its use as a surveillance platform, in retrospect, became much more strategically important than its nuclear standoff capability and because of this success, Regulus I and later Regulus II, were frequently used in a surveilling role. Without this, development of the Q-2 Firebee, Model 147 etc would not have been possible.

Post-Vietnam, special forces insertion began its still rigid traction amongst the submariner command structure and aviation was pushed to the wayside. So much so that the mission sets of the SEAL operators prompted the design (and re-design) of many new hulls for the silent service. Interestingly, perhaps ironically, these hull redesigns provided the real-estate necessary to reintroduce an aviation capability to the attack subs.

At first thought of as a support overwatch element to the SEAL teams, the Navy soon realized a platform like this could be used in a myriad of roles, including but not limited to, the long range strike mission harkening back to the original use of the Regulus I. Yet it is currently more often used for ISR, Bomb Damage Assessment, ECM and Electronic Attack/Electronic Warfare in the A2/AD.

And at this point I must be clear that I am not talking about the Tomahawk TLAM or anything Raytheon built for that matter.

There is a platform out there that lurks beneath the ocean waves that can perform much of the duties it’s much larger Air Force cousins do out of their sprawling airfields in the Middle East.

Where my mind immediately goes, is will this clandestine capability begin to shape the hulls of the next generation of submarines soon to be funded in congress. Being that subs can reach places that no other vessel, or aircraft for that matter, can penetrate, it’s an invaluable capability that simple cannot be ignored. Unless, of course, you don’t know about it in the first place.

Will future technology someday allow us to see the reawakening of the strategic ingenuity of the Imperial Japanese Navy and field hanger-laden submarines, equipped with high-performance super sonic aircraft ready to strike at a moments notice? I know now that I am not the only one to have asked this question.

Not sure about his language but he said I could freely ask you fellows about it here. Let me know what you think.

posted on May, 5 2015 @ 12:52 AM
Well the USS Jimmy Carter apparently launched a tiny drone to check out the bomb damage N. Korea did when it shelled that island a while back.

It's not surprising that submarines carry small UAV's that can be launched.

posted on May, 5 2015 @ 12:56 AM

The Cormorant was a project under development at Lockheed Martin's Skunk Works research facility until 2008 when its contract for development was cancelled. It is named after a species of bird.


The U.S. Navy's Ohio-class submarines, feature large, 44-foot-long (13 m), 7-foot-diameter (2.1 m), tubes to launch Trident missiles. Researchers at Skunk Works had the idea of creating a drone aircraft that can be stored in those missile tubes.

It sounds like a white program that went black.. Not surprising at the least to me..

posted on May, 5 2015 @ 12:59 AM

When North Korea shelled a South Korean island base in 2010, Jimmy Carter reportedly surfaced nearby and launched a small, quiet drone spy plane to photograph the damage.


Not to surprising, really. I would imagine that other submarines we have can do similar things.

posted on May, 5 2015 @ 01:54 AM
weve been launching drones out of those tubes for the last decade or two. Its no secret, i think LM even released a video about it on youtube. As far back as before Vietnam, I have my doubts.

posted on May, 5 2015 @ 02:39 AM
a reply to: aholic

Sounds like a contractors dream. Imagine the paycheck you could demand if you could fulfil the order.

But if you really wanted to cripple another nation just wait a couple of years. Affordable remote controlled submersible drone launchers will be available to hobbyists. A small payload could quite easily set off a chain reaction at one of the under-guarded coastal nuclear facilities.

posted on May, 5 2015 @ 04:48 AM
Promo for the Lockheed Cormorant UAV.

Cant work out if the wing is supposed to unfold or "morph" in the vid.
Apart from looking cool it shoots 1s and 0s out of it's nose.

edit on 5-5-2015 by Jukiodone because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 5 2015 @ 08:41 AM
a reply to: Jukiodone

I believe the wings folded from a hinge. Here is a pic of a mock-up looking like it is being tested near the water.

posted on May, 5 2015 @ 09:14 AM
a reply to: Sammamishman

Pretty cool youtube video

posted on May, 5 2015 @ 09:18 AM

originally posted by: Jukiodone
Apart from looking cool it shoots 1s and 0s out of it's nose.

I believe that these "1s and 0s shooting out of its nose" are supposed to mean that it's emitting radio information to its base under the form of bits.

posted on May, 5 2015 @ 11:00 AM
I saw a documentary that I cannot find right now, the filming crew were on-board of a submarine and they showed the re-purposed VLS tubes that were now carrying SDVs, but they also mentioned that UAVs had been stored in them previously. It would be rather surprising if they did not make use of that technology, if they can launch nuclear missiles from underwater, they sure can launch UAVs aswell.

But I wouldn't call it "the best kept secret of the US Navy". To find the best kept secret people should not be looking up, but way down below the seabed.
edit on 5-5-2015 by Clairaudience because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 5 2015 @ 11:19 AM
It's been operational since the late 1960s

posted on May, 5 2015 @ 11:22 AM
a reply to: Clairaudience

The VLS tubes of LA class boats can launch small UAVs. The larger tubes are required to launch the larger long endurance UAVs.
edit on 5/5/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 5 2015 @ 11:28 AM
a reply to: JIMC5499

Nice. Skydiver 1?

posted on May, 5 2015 @ 11:48 AM
a reply to: Zaphod58

Apparently they have also been using torpedo tubes to launch smaller UAVs.

posted on May, 5 2015 @ 12:00 PM
No seaview?

I'm surprised no ones done this one.

posted on May, 5 2015 @ 12:00 PM
a reply to: Clairaudience

That's another way to do it. It lets them keep missiles in the VLS.

posted on May, 5 2015 @ 12:01 PM
I have a feeling the Navy has more than just the type of drones that fly through the air. They might know more about drones than the air force.

Not to derail, but didn't he who shall not be named allude that the triangles may be navy based. Makes me wonder about all the reports from sailors and people around Puerto rico who say they see glowing lights under the sea that sometimes fly right out of the sea and off to who knows where. I remember one episode of UFO hunters had a guy who swears he saw a triangular set of glowing lights just below the ocean which then disappeared.

My mom said she was standing on the deck of a sailboat around 3 am having a smoke before I was born (so mid 70's ish) in the catalina channel when the ocean glowed for a second and something bright and glowing streaked out of the water about 100 yards away and off into space or over the horizon. Said it made no noise.

I believe her due to personal circumstances. And I've had a 688 surface a quarter mile behind a ferry I was on heading to catalina right in our wake. We sailed right over it and didn't notice.

So who knows what the navy has lurking under the oceans. But it makes a lot of sense. They've been spying and doing espionage since the halibut up in the Sea of Okhotsk. I think it was the halibut. And don't forget about the NR1. Bet they would want something like a mini drone version of her.

posted on May, 5 2015 @ 12:01 PM
Couldn't they also put mini-subs in the torpedo tubes?

posted on May, 5 2015 @ 12:05 PM
a reply to: BASSPLYR

It would make sense that any kind of clandestine space program would have Navy involvement. Operating in a closed system like a submarine is somewhat similar to operating a spaceship (environmental and life support systems).

Besides, I think the Navy is better funded than the Air Force anyway (at least publicly). Navies have historically always been the most important to a sovereign nation's security. Considering the world is 70% water -- these "USO's" would hide under the ocean really well. There aren't exactly windows on a nuke boat -- so the only way the crew would be aware of anything odd would be new people coming on board/leaving -- which for spec ops wouldn't be that big of a deal really.

new topics

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in