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.

 

Iran plans to shut down Persian Gulf, strike USN & Saudi if attacked

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 2 2006 @ 01:32 PM
link   
As stated, CVBG's don't operate in the Persian Gulf. Not saying they can't or haven't. They can do all they need to do in "blue water"or in Gulf of Oman. When operating under standard op procedures, CVBG's can defend itself quite well against 3 Iranian Kilos. What those Kilo's better be looking for are the US SSN's that come with a CVBG.




posted on Mar, 2 2006 @ 04:27 PM
link   

just wondering if they could be launched from ground bases?


The USAF did indeed develop a ground launched version of the Tomahawk called the BGM-109 Gryphon. This version was launched from a mobile launcher that carried four missiles, they had a range of approximately 1550 Miles. This version was first fired in 1980 and over 500 BGM-109G’s had been built when it was taken out of service from 88-91. The US and the USSR both signed at the time the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty which banned all ground launched long and intermediate range nuclear missiles.

Of course since we were narrow sighted we decided to destroyed this version instead of just replacing its nuclear payload with a conventional one. Thanks to this we are now left with only a Sea and Air launched version of the Tomahawk.


BGM-109G

[edit on 2-3-2006 by WestPoint23]



posted on Mar, 2 2006 @ 07:17 PM
link   
We would respond to CBG being attacked by sending in our 688 Los Angeles class fast attack Submarines and the new Seawolf class. Couple of MK-48 ADCAPs oughtta be enough to stop any Iranian ship they care to throw at us, and Tomcats off the carriers would kill any bombers carrying sea skimming anti-ship missiles. A 688 class nuclear submarine can track anything you throw at one, My dad told me that one of the hardest thing to track are the Diesels except when they cavitate surfacing to snorkel or running the diesel to recharge batteries, He also said the Akulas are a really fast and really quiet ship and you know how willing the russians are to sell their weapons. You have to have extremely well trained sailors to do anything, the USN makes submrainers go to sub school with 8 hour days and mandatory 3 hour study halls a night, our submariners are very well trained.
Go Navy!


[edit on 2-3-2006 by Senor_Vicente]



posted on Mar, 2 2006 @ 08:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by orangetom1999[/I]
Some of you guys need to think this business about the Persian Gulf and the straits through . .

What you are interested in is the depth of the water in the Gulf. I mean the usable navigable area with any depth to it for deep draft ships including submarines. There is not that much usable area in the Gulf. It is a navigable nightmare for submarines . . carriers either. Anyone in the Military business knows this.

What you are looking for is the operational patterns of diesel class submarines . . when they must come up and snort to recharge. They are very vulnerable even if all they do is stick up a snorkel. This information is already known about the kilo class boats. You can put the submarines up first on the list of targets . . like numero uno. Why? Because the pucker factor in the event of a loose submarine is like numero uno also "any type of submarine."

Docking facilities are undoubtedly on the list also. Any drydocks . . shipyards . . Warehousing et al. Don’t you think this information is already known and catalogued? Also I don’t know the status of the Tomahawk missiles . . as far as deep penetration abilities. Obviously any deep penetration warheads are specialized ordinance types.

The range I know about concerning submarine launched Tomahawk missiles is about 800 to 1000 miles. This information may be out of date depending on what updates or modifications are current. Thanks,
Orangetom



I think US subs have superior electronics, quieter propulsion, are much faster and can dive much deeper. Throw in our crews are vastly better trained and our maintenance should be first class. I wonder if the Iranian subs can fire any kind of specialized torpedo? Although I have no confidence at all in our LEADER, who I call Quick Draw, who advocates Justice West of the Pecos, Judge Roy Bean style, or as others more concisely characterize him, Boy Blunder. Surely those around him have him on a tight leash by now. We cannot end the War in Iraq in any graceful way, and the Taliban are getting stronger by the day in Afghan. I’d bet you $100 to a dime that 1) the taliban would win an open election in Afghan, and 2) that less than 1/4th of the $20 B. We promised in 2001 has been delivered.

THERE WILL BE NO WAR WITH IRAN in this decade. Geo W is ON THE CAMPAIGN trail and he means to jerk the American public around using the FEAR factor, his strongest attribute according to the polls. That’s all. Everything will be back to normal after November 7.



posted on Mar, 2 2006 @ 09:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Senor_Vicente
He also said the Akulas are a really fast and really quiet ship and you know how willing the russians are to sell their weapons. You have to have extremely well trained sailors to do anything, the USN makes submrainers go to sub school with 8 hour days and mandatory 3 hour study halls a night, our submariners are very well trained.
Go Navy!


[edit on 2-3-2006 by Senor_Vicente]


Well.. selling a NUCLEAR sub to a country that is already getting screwed over for PROCESSING uranium is not possible.The Russians won't do it, nor will the Chinese..

Anyhow signing a nuclear deal with a country that is not a signatory of the CTBT,NPT,NSG,MTCR... etc. etc. while cornering one for processing uranium could be construed as "double-standards" by some.. but hey I/we ain't complainin'!


And about working hours..hehe.. I don't know about Iranians but here in Asia, its a completely different story..


About the Kilos..
Well after some reasearch I concluded that the Iranian Kilos ain't as good as I thought em' to be.. I don't think they have those antiship Klub missiles which have a range of 220km..
However if they can sneak up to USN ships then they are a real threat.
And kilos are quiet...real quiet..
Kilo Class (877EKM)

[edit on 2-3-2006 by Daedalus3]



posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 12:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by JamesinOz
Could Iran's Kilo class subs evade US attack subs and anti-sub ships and torpedo a ship or carrier in a CBG? What are a CBG's anti submarine defences like? I've been told stories by former Aussie submariners about Aussie subs following undetected several hundred feet behind a CVN for hours at a time in quiet diesel subs during naval exercises with the USN. I'm relatively ignorant about this subject so would interested to hear what others have to say.


[edit on 2-3-2006 by JamesinOz]


and you don't think that there weren't any us subs following the aussie subs.

years ago i used to build the card cages that went inot our attack subs for wire guided torpedoes. when we needed to make a change, a civilian engineere from the navy had to aprove the simple soldering change. this was when the "Hunt for Red October" was in big in the theator. while he could not tell what he knew hed did say that the movie was quite accurate as to submarines and us capabilities.

-being able to identify subs by the noise signetures

-being able to get sound bearing miles away

-the sosus nets in the atlantic and pacific

this was all 16 years ago and was basicly old technology then.

even though new diesel subs are very quiet when running on batteries, it would be of no suprise if we had expanded the sosus net around the world and have much better abilities to track subs even the most quiet ones



posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 07:31 AM
link   
bigx01, I hope you are correct.



posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 09:14 AM
link   

even though new diesel subs are very quiet when running on batteries, it would be of no suprise if we had expanded the sosus net around the world and have much better abilities to track subs even the most quiet ones


I was just recently watching a documentary on the USS Texas (SSN-775) and the sonar operator on the sub was explaining the capabilities of the sonar arrays on the Virginia class SSN which has 9 sonar arrays. And he said that for a standard ship the detection range is about a 1000 miles away.

Then they showed a testing site up in a lake somewhere in Idaho where they test and evaluate the acoustic sounds emitted by all US Subs/Ships. One of the testing engineers on this site said their hydrophones are so sensitive they can even hear when the snow is falling on the water.



posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 09:57 AM
link   
ok , the iranians do this:


plant a noise maker inside a small mine fieled - the noise makers sounds like a kilo snorking her diesels.


a seawolf (or whatever) comes into to collect the kilo and BAM runs into a mine.

one dead seawolf.


and the depth of the gulf does not bode well for attack subs who live in the cold and the deep.


warm and shallow makes for nuke boats to be target practise.



posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 10:05 AM
link   

plant a noise maker inside a small mine fieled - the noise makers sounds like a kilo snorking her diesels.


a seawolf (or whatever) comes into to collect the kilo and BAM runs into a mine.

one dead seawolf.


Yeah maybe in some moronic fantasy war scenario, you don’t think US subs have system to help them avoid or identify mine fields or mines? And you also don’t think that such a strategic place such as the Persian Gulf has not been wired with US hydrophones and sensors just incase the S... hits the fan?



posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 10:09 AM
link   
LOL


plastic mines cannot be detected - and how , pray tell can a hydrophone detect a stationary item without a noisy power supply ???



posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23


Yeah maybe in some moronic fantasy war scenario, you don’t think US subs have system to help them avoid or identify mine fields or mines? And you also don’t think that such a strategic place such as the Persian Gulf has not been wired with US hydrophones and sensors just incase the S... hits the fan?


Well if they have then the Iranians know about it..



posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Well if they have then the Iranians know about it..


Not necessarily, look at the Cold War and how much the Russians new about our operations near their ports and waters.


plastic mines cannot be detected - and how , pray tell can a hydrophone detect a stationary item without a noisy power supply ???


...Point being that the Iranians would not be able to plant significant mine fields without attracting attention.



posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 05:00 PM
link   
With all of the emphasis on "quiet" subs and "passive detection systems" , don't forget that "active" systems (sonobuoys) find "quiet" Kilo's quite well! The Persian Gulf shouldn't be hard to sanitize, ASW speaking. If Iranian subs want to come on out into deeper water as well, then "let's play!".

[edit on 3/3/2006 by JungleMike]



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 01:38 AM
link   
WHat station or program was this documentary on about the USS Texas??
Curious about this. Havent had much time for television here lately.
Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 01:42 AM
link   
are you sure our submarine maintnance is first class?? Think on this one awhile.

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 02:04 AM
link   
There was a thread not too long ago about the US Navy being overated, because some 10,000 out of around 340,000 failed a drug test. And other such things that. I have searched for the thread as best I could, can anyone else find it?

Anyhow, even if the USN is over rated as some seem to think, you still believe that Irans 3 Kilos will be able to put that much of a hurt on even one CBG? As far as our sub maintenance goes, you ever here of a US sub accident in recent years due to maintenance problems? There was an accident in 2005 but that was when the USS San Francisco hit an underwater mountain. Even after that the sub made it back to port under its own steam, just on the surface and not below it. I think the maintenance on these subs is up to standards. Otherwise there would surely be a maintenance related incident somewhere along the line.

[edit on 3/4/2006 by ludaChris]



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 03:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by JamesinOz
bigx01, I hope you are correct.


i'm correct as to what was in the late 80's

the sosus net has been know publicly since the fall of the soviet union. everything has a unique sound signeture, just as everything has a unique infrared signeture



i never knew we had wire guided torpedoes till we built the card cages. since this was unclasified weapons we didn't have to go through security screening to build the hardware. although you should have seen the look on the ups people when our packages were labled "navel undersea warfare dept. keyport wa"

got some strange looks from the counter girl.



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 07:50 AM
link   
This is about as relevant as a banner headline stating that 'if seriously attacked the US would respond in a serious manner!.
Is that really meant to say anything to anybody?
Is it 'news'?
Would anyone be in the least bit surprised by such a statement of the obvious?

Most countries that I ever heard of say that if they are attacked they will respond and attack back those that are attacking them (and most likely their allies too - particularly if these is already animosity between them and if it will hurt the main attacker).
Anyone heard different?


Originally posted by donwhite
THERE WILL BE NO WAR WITH IRAN in this decade. Geo W is ON THE CAMPAIGN trail and he means to jerk the American public around using the FEAR factor, his strongest attribute according to the polls. That’s all. Everything will be back to normal after November 7.


- I agree 100%; I too am now convinced this is correct donw.

Everything from now on will wind down to be noise and sullen 'we weren't going to anyway' comments.

This is because the scenario of a sneak Iranian attack with umteen of their supposedly new long-range and accurate missiles with the nuclear warheads (conjured from who knows where) is now known to be false.

Iran is incapable of 'knocking out' Israel's nuclear retaliatory capability even if they did have nuclear warheads right now on their long-range missiles.

Deterrence rules once again.

Because Israel is saying so.


Submarines may be used for hitting strategic targets outside Israel's territory, chief commander of the IDF's submarine fleet, Colonel Yoni, stated. "The submarine task force is preparing for any scenario the State of Israel has defined as plausible for the army," he added.

In an interview with Ynet, Colonel Yoni revealed some of the capabilities of the Israeli army's most hi-tech and secret war machine, and hinted to the possible role of subs in future military disputes.......

...... While Colonel Yoni's statements are shrouded in mystery, publications in the foreign press have already hinted Israel's Dolphin submarines have the ability to carry and launch nuclear weapons, a capability that will be put to use should the country's nuclear ground bases are hit in a surprise attack.

www.ynetnews.com...

- That makes it rather difficult for those trying to hawk around the idea, with any shred of credibility, that Iran is hell-bent on trying to destroy Israel by sneak nuclear missile attack when Israel in turn, if attacked, could and would destroy Iran with undetectable and unstoppable submarine launched nuclear missiles.

(Like as if Israel's response could ever have been 'knocked out' anyway.......or that she would not be aided in her terrible response by outside help from the US.
)

Now the serious negotiations can carry on properly and the USA will just have to cope and live with an Iranian oil bourse selling in Euros
The idea may well be spreading - some very important and senior Norway are also talking about this idea.


Bourse Director Sven Arild Andersen is fed up with Norwegian oil having to be traded in London and wants to have a commodities and energy bourse in Norway.

The Bourse Director believes that Norway already has the prerequisites for building up a Norwegian or Scandinavian energy bourse.

"This would in such case compete with the bourse in London. Why not have the ambition to outcompete the British petroleum bourse," says Sven Arild Andersen.

"Here, you could trade crude oil, natural gas contracts and establish derivatives for these products."

"In addition, we must set up a larger financial industry around this, as important in other large markets and employ many people. And which are important for the competencies that are needed beyond the extraction itself of oil and gas," says Andersen.

Andersen in of the opinion that Norwegian oil must be traded in Euros, which can be advantageous for international customers.

"We have performed market studies and both Russia, which is a large oil exporter, as well as the countries of the Middle East have large parts of their economies in Euros.

www.energybulletin.net...

- Personally I see this all as nothing more than the inevitable repercussions of Bush & Co. and their idiotic, hypocritical, fear and war-mongering 'Axis of evil' ( a rather pale and ridiculous attempt at grabbing a bit of the 'Reagan' mantel' and replicating for a modern age his 'evil empire' stuff......Russia scared and deeply worried people yes but Iraq, Syria, Iran and North Korea?), 'With us or against us' politics.

I just hope the American people continue to show their er, 'gratitude' to these guys when it comes to polling day and that the current poll numbers are reflected in a fair and accurate ballot.

Then maybe we can all put the whole tragic espisode behind us and start cooperating reasonably and properly for the benefit of all.

Self-centred politics come and go and may have their day but sooner or later people wake up to the fact that too much of that leads to ignoring the much wider and far more important concerns than that which require genuine cooperation and partnerships to tackle.
The wheel turns.
Always.

Whilst I rate Bush as a piss-poor President (and quite dangerous, given the means at his disposal and his obvious ideological intent) at least he isn't my President and he is on a time-limit.

The only thing I'd worry about would be whether he now recognises himself as a busted flush and tried something particularly dangerous and reckless to distract his public - but even then when it comes down to it I don't imagine he is anymore of a genuinely suicidal psycho anymore than that other piss-poor reckless President out in Iran.


[edit on 4-3-2006 by sminkeypinkey]



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 08:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by JamesinOz
if attacked by the US or Isreal Iran plans to immediately
block the Straits of Hormuz, attack US carrier battle groups,
stop all Gulf oil exports and attack Saudi oil facilities.


So if Israel attacks Iran, Iran will turn around and attack
one of it's Muslim neighbors, a neighbor who also hates Israel??

I don't get it.

WHY would they attack Saudi Arabia?? This makes no sense.
Then again, the Iranian leader never makes any sense.
He's a whack.







 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join