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.

 

Submarines - do we need them ?

page: 1
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 4 2005 @ 10:45 PM
link   
While it's nice to have a full range of weaponry, budget restrictions inevitably mean that we have to spend our money as effectively as possible.

I have no problems with the SSBNs, but find myself wondering if we really need the attack boats (Los Angeles, Sea Wolf, Virginia class). Chasing around after boomers is a cold war relic, so the navy has admitted that the newer boats will be optimized for littoral (shallow water) operations.

With this new role in mind, the navy is busy fitting VLS Tomahawk land attack missiles to their subs - it's almost like a desparate (and expensive) attempt to get involved in the war against terrorism by using billion dollar subs to launch missiles that could be launched from Corvettes costing one tenth as much.

So what do you think, are attack subs a waste of money ?




posted on Jul, 5 2005 @ 12:23 AM
link   
Attack boats do a LOT more than just chase boomers around. They deliver SEAL teams to their targets, there's a wonderful psychological value to them because nobody knows exactly where they operate, so you never know if there's one near you. They have the VLS capability now, the Virginia is going to have a lot more advanced capability to them. If you ask me, we need MORE fast attack boats.



posted on Jul, 5 2005 @ 06:42 AM
link   
You say you support the idea of SSBNs and SSGNs, but what do you suppose watches over those boats? The only ballistic sub class left in the US is the Ohio-class. The newest one was built in the mid 80s. They are relics of the Cold War, but are completely nessessary. Many are being removed from active duty, while others are being fitted as a massive underwater Talmahawk missile platform. That being said, these vessels are huge in mass and size, as compared to a smaller, more manuverable Los Angeles, and the new Virginia classes.

An Ohio simply cant turn as fast or manuver as fast, thus it is a vulnerability. I had a friend that was on an Ohio, and he said the best weapon of his boat was its stealth. Thier vessel was ultraquiet, and in war games, even the best frigate and submarine has a hard time finding one of our own. That doesnt mean that the Ohio is undetectable.

That is why there are attack boats. Thier primary function during the Cold War was to trail the Soviet missile submarines. And if 'it' ever hit the fan, a couple of torpedoes could save millions of lives. The second function was the protection of our missile submarines. They would take out the Soviet attack subs, which by the way, are much faster than our own Los Angeles class subs. But the Soviet subs were far easier to detect, and thus, easier to take out.

Attack boats may seem useless now, but when Chinas navy ever puts to sea, you will see thier worth. Similarly, alot of people said the same thing about the submarine before WWI and WWII. If it wasnt for the submarine, we might all be speaking Japanese right now.



posted on Jul, 5 2005 @ 11:17 AM
link   
We need attack subs... why... well when war with china starts we don't have attack subs to hunt down chinese sub fleet and we in big trouble.



posted on Jul, 5 2005 @ 12:03 PM
link   
There is no other thing that goes on wahter that could do the same as the subs...



posted on Jul, 5 2005 @ 12:23 PM
link   
The submarine is the most cost efficient weapon system/platform deployed today.



seekerof

[edit on 5-7-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Jul, 5 2005 @ 12:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
The submarine is the most cost efficient weapon system/deployed deployed today.

seekerof


problem is that subs are almost as expensive as the carriers. but im just leaving out how many people it takes and to keep feeding them while maning these beasts as well as maintaining them, etc.



posted on Jul, 5 2005 @ 02:31 PM
link   
One of the prime not so touted roles of submarines is intelligence gathering...espionage if you like. On our friends as well as our enemies.

Ever price sattelite technology??? Suggest you check it out.

Submarines can do certian espionage/intelligence gathering not possible with Satellites with added flexibility for other missions also not possible with satellites. This is the value of the submarine in the marketplace. Even more so that many surface ships.
If you ever are able to get a feel for the quality,character traits, virtues of a submariner or the training they put them through verses a surface ship sailor...you will come to realize that the boats and crews are a cut apart from the rest of the navy. Thus indicating the value of submarine service to their respective governments. The weeding out process for crewmembers is very thorough especially the nuclear/engineering side of the house. Once again indicating value and importance of the boats.

I dont remember the authors but they wrote a book titled "Blind Mans Bluff." A very intresting though not all inclusive book, for obvious reasons, about some of the intelligence gathering missions of the American submarine fleets. It is a good read.

Just some additional info for your consideration,
Orangetom



posted on Jul, 5 2005 @ 02:43 PM
link   
Here is an example, even thought were not nessecarily in a cold war with a major super power, this is just an example of the kinda of espionage submarines can be used for.

espionage/special forces mission

[edit on 5-7-2005 by blue cell]



posted on Jul, 5 2005 @ 03:10 PM
link   
the costs are due to size and tech jumps

the plans for new subs iirc are to make them smaller and more cost effective, the large cold war era subs are on the way out.

Just wonder if the US is building its replacement for the Ohio class and why havent they started it already, smaller boats with few missiles but more of them!



posted on Jul, 5 2005 @ 04:36 PM
link   
a good number of the Ohio class SSBNs have been retired from service in accordance with treaty obligations. Some of them are being converted to tomahawk launch platforms using the existing missle tubes to hold seven or so tomahawks each.
A increasing number of SSN attack boats have been modified or built from scratch to carry 12 tomahawk missles each from vertical launch system tubes in the foreward ballast tanks.
The tomahawk cruise missle can be configured to carry diffrent types of payloads. It is not fixed to a standard payload.
This vertical launch tomahawk system is also in use on surface ships.
The success of this system has taken the place of many of the Ohio Class SSBNs. These attack boats can maneuver in very close to any shore to launch so range is not a big problem.

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Jul, 5 2005 @ 05:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by WissNX01
The only ballistic sub class left in the US is the Ohio-class. The newest one was built in the mid 80s.


The newest, USS Lousiana was built in the early 90's and commissioned in around '96-97.


Originally posted by Char2c35t
Just wonder if the US is building its replacement for the Ohio class and why havent they started it already, smaller boats with few missiles but more of them!



I don't think a follow up class of SSBNs will be deployed for some time. (not for 20 years at least imo)



posted on Jul, 5 2005 @ 07:09 PM
link   
I've heard that one of the things about the Ohio is that they used to have to look for what wasn't there to detect them. They were so quiet that they usually couldn't detect the noise of the sub, so they'd look for "holes" in the background noise. The sub would block the background noise, so when they'd find one, they'd go look and see if they found an Ohio. The best defense of an SSBN is making themselves a hole in the water, since they were slower and less manuverable than the fast attack boats.



posted on Jul, 5 2005 @ 08:30 PM
link   
And we also need those submarines for submarine movies



posted on Jul, 6 2005 @ 07:06 AM
link   
Shhhhhhhhhh!!!!! Quiet....dont tell that tidbit too loud. Shhhhhhhh!!!

Think Quiet!!!!

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Mar, 3 2008 @ 12:31 AM
link   
Anyone who thinks submarines are unnecesary is a fool. every third and fourth world nation is buying subs from Russia, China India, Germany < Holland and every other place that builds them. Pakistan has a DOZEN submarines which can fire missiles. Anyone seeing thr thread to destruction? The submarine is 90% a defensive weapon now, it is a THREAT. But it CAN beused to blackmail nations with the threat of nuclear weapons. The countries fielding these subs are not a threat to the US yet but they will be in 5 to 10 years. They are capable RIGHT NOW of lobbing a dirty missle on our country but refrain from doing so knowing that the massive retaliation would crush them. SO, MAD works for now but the religious extremists don't care about that. Radical Muslims think when they kill a non-believer they go to paradise with 72 virgins for eternity. it is obvious the poor, deluded, manipulated masses of the world are pissed. # THEM, blame thrir governments, leaders or whoever is their spokesperson. Killing innocent people to get attention is horribly wrong and against ANY religious teachings. These are just a bunch of punks with terrorist governments backing them. They have nothing so NOONE should have any more. Kill the infidel. You know this BS has been going on for 1000 years, why? Even the differant Muslim sects kill each other. How about some tolerance andflexibility, and love of each other.



posted on Mar, 3 2008 @ 08:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by orangetom1999
a good number of the Ohio class SSBNs have been retired from service in accordance with treaty obligations. Some of them are being converted to tomahawk launch platforms using the existing missle tubes to hold seven or so tomahawks each.


No 726-class boats have been retired. 4 were converted to SSGN service but no Ohio class has been decommissioned yet. Don't expect to see that for at least 15 years.

To my knowledge, no 688s were ever converted to add VLS tubes for Tomahawks. Flight II 688s did have the VLS tubes, but no Flight I 688s had tubes added at a later date. That's a large factor in why Flight I 688s are being decommed.

The design effort for the next SSBN class is to begin in 2009-2010, so expect a new SSBN to be in the water 10-15 years from now to coincide with retiring the SSBN-730 and later boomers.

[edit on 3-3-2008 by oxillini]



posted on Mar, 3 2008 @ 11:01 AM
link   
Most countries that have them want them to fire missiles/nukes at any larger force that they're fighting. So if, say, the US started a war against a country with nuclear subs, the US would get nuked in retalliation, thereby making the US less likely to even start such a war.



posted on Mar, 3 2008 @ 11:32 AM
link   
reply to post by dave420
 


Keep in my mind that only the Big 5 of nuclear weapons actually have SSBN's though.



posted on Mar, 3 2008 @ 11:58 AM
link   
If we ever have another large scale naval conflict we may need our own Hunter/Killer subs to go after the Diesel/Electric subs many second and third tier navies have.

Some of the new Gas/Electric Boats can stay submerged for weeks and don’t make much more noise then a small kitchen appliance. If Iran had one of these boats they could easily go after one of our carriers.

The U.S. Navy borrowed one of these newer Diesel/Electric subs and did its best to track it over a two year period and it continued to elude them every time.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join