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.

 

New iranian Sub

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 17 2005 @ 12:20 PM
link   
Actually the US Navy has every existing known ship identified and tagged. Trust me on this. My cousin used to be on a nuclear attack boat working sonar.




posted on May, 17 2005 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3
And as for the capability of a kilo (don't know about other d/e subs) w.r.t. a nuc powered sub.. the kilo can detect its adversary at 2 to 3 times the distance the adversary can..That holds for something.. esp when the subs are deployed in a defensive role and are not "scrambled" so to say to a far off destination..




Why do you think a Kilo would detect something like a seawolf @ 2 to 3 times of the distance of what the seawolf could detect the kilo??????



posted on May, 17 2005 @ 02:13 PM
link   
acoustic signature is not necessarily gathered by submarine to submarine techniques. It can be gathered by other methods...sonarbouys..for example..dipping sonar. or other remote sensors...and fed to the platform doing the hunting.
Just thought you guys would like to know this.

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on May, 17 2005 @ 02:51 PM
link   
To continue my above post, once a submarines tonals and signature are entered into the computer it narrows the search and makes it 1000 times easier to detect a submarine. Once the computer knows what to look for most of the hard work is over.

Regarding the Kilo, my cousin has told me that there is not a ship in the world a US Los Angelos and Seawolf can not find. I do not know if this is the truth but I seriously doubt he would lie when he is no longer in the Navy.



posted on May, 18 2005 @ 02:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by orangetom1999
You dont carry a bunch of stuff protruding from the deck and make any decent speed...proper submarines are clean hulls. Unblended protrusions cause cavitation and bubbles giving away your postition. You have to go deeper to reduce the cavitation signature and take advantage of seawater pressure. You still have the problem of making speed submerged especially with unfaired equipment strapped to the deck. ie..handrails...canisters .etc etc.

Thanks ,
Orangetom
The iranian submarine are designed for shallow water of Persian Gulf and they are excellent for laying mines.



posted on May, 18 2005 @ 02:54 PM
link   
I agree with your assessment Persian concerning shallow water. When one looks at the persian gulf the usable area of deep water for maneuverabilty is not that great. Blue water navys and their ships need very accurate charts to maneuver in this area. Particulary deep draft submarines. Maneuvering in these waters with all the deep draft tankers transiting these waters is very dangerous for a submarine....any submarine. This is why I was particularly alarmed to see a Los Angeles class submarine in these waters during the first Gulf war. I surmised that they wanted to test the tomahawk cruise missle under actual combat conditions. It seemed to have worked as they are incorporating this system into all American Attack boats since.
Mine laying...now that is intresting. Curious as to how these mines are layed from a submarine like the Kilo class??? Do you know??
Also curious as to why anyone would consider laying mines in the Persian
Gulf...??? The Gulf being an area of high transit for the worlds commerce. This commerce hinges on massive loans from world class commercial banks..large insurance companys who insure the loans as well as the ships themeslves...and of course world class merchants.
My point in this angle..is that it is one thing to take on the militarys of other nations ..it is quite another to take on the merchants of the world.. The two are not the same.
Curious about this . Wondering if the Iranians are thinking this angle??

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on May, 18 2005 @ 10:26 PM
link   


Also curious as to why anyone would consider laying mines in the Persian Gulf?

Because 40% of world’s oil have to pass from Persian Gulf and most of it goes to US. In the case US decided to attack Iran, Iran can close Persian Gulf and stop the flow of oil to disrupt US economy.



posted on May, 18 2005 @ 10:51 PM
link   
The only problem I see with blocking the PG with mines is that the US has enough oil in reserve to sustain the war machine. Granted the citizens may be cut off but unless the full scale war lasted a long time it would not effect America's war machine.



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 03:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by subcane
The only problem I see with blocking the PG with mines is that the US has enough oil in reserve to sustain the war machine. Granted the citizens may be cut off but unless the full scale war lasted a long time it would not effect America's war machine.
US has enough oil reserve for only three months.



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 08:04 AM
link   
It wouldn't take three months to sweep the Persian Gulf clean of mines.



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 09:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3
well what it means is that they are "interested" in the vessel.. and such military interest only arises when one wants to learn more about the subject at hand..
I don't think such requests are made unless there is something the US desires to know about the sub..
requests for fielding SPECIFIC units in an exercise aren't ussually placed..

And as for the capability of a kilo (don't know about other d/e subs) w.r.t. a nuc powered sub.. the kilo can detect its adversary at 2 to 3 times the distance the adversary can..That holds for something.. esp when the subs are deployed in a defensive role and are not "scrambled" so to say to a far off destination..

nuke subs obv. are flexible in deployment due to their inherent "longevity " at sea..


With all due respect, you are completely incorrect. First of all, the US Navy has had definite, first-hand acoustic signature data of the Kilo class SS for about 20 years. The signatures of this class is well known and understood. How do I know this? Well, being a US Navy veteran, I have seen this data with my own eyes, and I continue to do so even to this day. If the US Navy asked the Indians for the participation of their Kilos, it was most likely so that they could familiarize their new sub drivers and other CO's with the class - nothing beats having practiced against the real McCoy. Also, you never pass up an opportunity to glean acoustic intelligence against any foreign submarine if you can help it - it only makes your AOB that much more strong and reliable.

Your comments about detection ranges and capabilities are completely inaccurate. You make no distinction between the various classes of nuclear submarines that the DE boat would be detecting. There is a hug differents in acoustic stealth between a Han class SSN and a Trafalgar class SSN. And an even bigger difference between a Trafalgar and a Seawolf class SSN. You assumptions are also based on the premise that an SSN cannot operate as quietly as an SS. Are you absolutely sure of that? I don't think so. The Seawolf, when operating in littoral waters at speeds used by SS class vessels, is designed to be just as quiet. The US Navy has understood the threat from DE boats for many years, and the Seawolf was puposely designed to meet these challenges. The US Navy also has a number of deployable sensor systems (other than those installed on SSNs) that are fully capable of tracking and classifying small DE boats, such as the Kilo. The Advanced Deployable System (ADS) is a good example of one.

Also, you assertion that DE boats are used primarily in defensive roles, while being a popular opinion, is not entirely accurate. Submarines are offensive weapon systems, they always have been and they always will be. Any submarine that lacks range, endurance, speed, and weapons payload capability when compared to its opponents must be rated low. DE boats are used in defensive roles by naval warfare planners because their limited capabilties dictate they they must be employed in this manner.

A DE boat loitering around a harbor, coastline, or island chain is just a fish in a big barrel, waiting to be caught. Although the popular perception of the DE boat commander is analogous to the WWII German U-Boat commanders and their daring (and desperate) exploits during that conflict, one has to wonder what would really happen to small DE units in the face of modern NATO SSN forces determined to advance. Our only contemorary example is the Argentine Navy's Type 209s versus the RN, and we all know how that turned out.

Nukes are bigger, badder, and meaner. They go faster and further, hit harder, hit more often, and are more survivable. And with the advent of the Astute class and the Seawolf class, DE boats will no longer have the upper hand in littoral waters, and the hunters will become the hunted.




posted on May, 19 2005 @ 10:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pyros

Originally posted by Daedalus3
well what it means is that they are "interested" in the vessel.. and such military interest only arises when one wants to learn more about the subject at hand..
I don't think such requests are made unless there is something the US desires to know about the sub..
requests for fielding SPECIFIC units in an exercise aren't ussually placed..

And as for the capability of a kilo (don't know about other d/e subs) w.r.t. a nuc powered sub.. the kilo can detect its adversary at 2 to 3 times the distance the adversary can..That holds for something.. esp when the subs are deployed in a defensive role and are not "scrambled" so to say to a far off destination..

nuke subs obv. are flexible in deployment due to their inherent "longevity " at sea..


With all due respect, you are completely incorrect. First of all, the US Navy has had definite, first-hand acoustic signature data of the Kilo class SS for about 20 years. The signatures of this class is well known and understood. How do I know this? Well, being a US Navy veteran, I have seen this data with my own eyes, and I continue to do so even to this day. If the US Navy asked the Indians for the participation of their Kilos, it was most likely so that they could familiarize their new sub drivers and other CO's with the class - nothing beats having practiced against the real McCoy. Also, you never pass up an opportunity to glean acoustic intelligence against any foreign submarine if you can help it - it only makes your AOB that much more strong and reliable.

Your comments about detection ranges and capabilities are completely inaccurate. You make no distinction between the various classes of nuclear submarines that the DE boat would be detecting. There is a hug differents in acoustic stealth between a Han class SSN and a Trafalgar class SSN. And an even bigger difference between a Trafalgar and a Seawolf class SSN. You assumptions are also based on the premise that an SSN cannot operate as quietly as an SS. Are you absolutely sure of that? I don't think so. The Seawolf, when operating in littoral waters at speeds used by SS class vessels, is designed to be just as quiet. The US Navy has understood the threat from DE boats for many years, and the Seawolf was puposely designed to meet these challenges. The US Navy also has a number of deployable sensor systems (other than those installed on SSNs) that are fully capable of tracking and classifying small DE boats, such as the Kilo. The Advanced Deployable System (ADS) is a good example of one.

Also, you assertion that DE boats are used primarily in defensive roles, while being a popular opinion, is not entirely accurate. Submarines are offensive weapon systems, they always have been and they always will be. Any submarine that lacks range, endurance, speed, and weapons payload capability when compared to its opponents must be rated low. DE boats are used in defensive roles by naval warfare planners because their limited capabilties dictate they they must be employed in this manner.

A DE boat loitering around a harbor, coastline, or island chain is just a fish in a big barrel, waiting to be caught. Although the popular perception of the DE boat commander is analogous to the WWII German U-Boat commanders and their daring (and desperate) exploits during that conflict, one has to wonder what would really happen to small DE units in the face of modern NATO SSN forces determined to advance. Our only contemorary example is the Argentine Navy's Type 209s versus the RN, and we all know how that turned out.

Nukes are bigger, badder, and meaner. They go faster and further, hit harder, hit more often, and are more survivable. And with the advent of the Astute class and the Seawolf class, DE boats will no longer have the upper hand in littoral waters, and the hunters will become the hunted.



dont forget the new Virginia class subs. they are specifically design for the littoral waters. the Seawolf was design during the Cold war 1980s specifically to fight in Soviet's turf like in the Arctic Ocean. it could be able to fight in littoral waters but the Virginia which has more computer processing power than all the subs in the U.S. Navy could do the job better.



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 11:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by persian



Also curious as to why anyone would consider laying mines in the Persian Gulf?

Because 40% of world’s oil have to pass from Persian Gulf and most of it goes to US. In the case US decided to attack Iran, Iran can close Persian Gulf and stop the flow of oil to disrupt US economy.


Maybe 40% of the worlds oil, but I remember seeing something not too long ago that said IIRC only 17% of the US's oil supply comes from the mideast contrary to what people like OPEC want you to believe.



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 11:28 AM
link   

dont forget the new Virginia class subs. they are specifically design for the littoral waters. the Seawolf was design during the Cold war 1980s specifically to fight in Soviet's turf like in the Arctic Ocean. it could be able to fight in littoral waters but the Virginia which has more computer processing power than all the subs in the U.S. Navy could do the job better.


Yes, yes. I stand corrected. In my previous post, last paragraph I meant to say Virginia class, not Seawolf class.



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 11:37 AM
link   
great, iran with a sub

kinda gives ya the warm fuzzies don't it ?....



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 06:38 PM
link   
Its been years since I've seen one but it was a soundings chart of the Persian Gulf. My first thought was ..the usable water depth for large deep draft tankers is not that great. It wouldnt take that much to run aground out there. My second thought was ...not a good place to run a submarine and get run over by one of these deep draft loaded tankers. If you were unlucky enough to survive it..you probably would never be able to get yourself off the mud on the bottom. Or could you even get a hatch to open?? Good grief...what a way to go!!! For any submarine.
I reckon you'd need very good teamwork between the skipper , navigators and sonarmen to keep from running aground or run over in a place like this.

Orangetom



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 06:42 PM
link   
How are mines laid from a kilo class submarine???


Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 07:02 PM
link   
there are some new developements in non nuclear boats out there. Air Independent Propulsion for one. While this technology is not new it is being improved as time goes by. These advances are being watched closely by the US Navy as well as other nations.
A well manned well equipped conventional boat is still a respected threat in any waters. Advances in Sonar technology,weapons load outs and crew training have moved the bar up on these conventional boats.
The one drawback to many nations developing and updating these boats is costs. Good quiet features cost lots of moneys to operate over a wide range of conditions even in conventional boats.
Throw in the feature of a nuclear plant..good grief..the costs go through the roof.
These Kilo class boats ..I'm thinking must be an early attempt by the Iranians to branch out into the submarine buisness. They are going to have their hands full in the Gulf. So will we...following them. Not much room there for playing chicken of the sea.

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on May, 20 2005 @ 07:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by orangetom1999
How are mines laid from a kilo class submarine???


Thanks,
Orangetom


Mines are typically laid from submarines via the torpedo tube(s). They get launched out, sink to the bottom, then are automatically secured to the bottom. They can then be remotely activated when the sub clears the area. Not much precise information on this process is available, however, as I am sure it is classified.



posted on May, 20 2005 @ 09:11 AM
link   
yes Pyros..thanks..I am familiar with that operation as I work for Newport News Shipbuilding.

I was particularly intrested in the kilo class submarine operation in minelaying. I recall the last time they mined the Persian Gulf. I did not realize that tankers are not that easy to sink..with contact mines. These contact mines must have been dropped from surface patrol vessels. I dont think they did it with the kinds of mines of which you speak.
If this is the case ..with kilo class boats..they have upgraded. To be expected of course.

I have seen the Super Sea Stallions here from Norfolk dragging the "Sled" across the bay.

Thanks Pyros,
Orangetom




top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join