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.

 

US NAVY punked by upstart Third Worlders!

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 24 2006 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by JIMC5499

Originally posted by orangetom1999

Have any of you people actually heard sonar operating from a submarine. I dont mean in movies ..I mean actually heard the real thing?? Active sonar??

Think long and hard on this one.

Orangetom


Yes I have. I've heard the active sonar from a Los Angelas class attack sub, by way of the dipped sonar transducer in an SH-3H Sea King helicopter. One thing that you need to consider about active sonar. Active sonar in shallow water is almost usless unless it is used at short range in a directed beam. The frequency of the sonar also needs to vary between pulses.

Ever hear of a "convergence zone"? You get a convergence zone where sound energy that is reflected off of both the surface and bottom converges. Think of it like a pair of sine waves exactly 180 degrees off from each other. Where they converge is the convergence zone. If a target is in the zone it can be detected at a greater distance. The problem with shallow water is that there are too many convergence zones too close together and this creates interference.

I could go into more detail but I'm not sure what is and is not classified these days. I got out of ASW 19 years ago. Nothing that I have mentioned here hasn't already been published in Popular Science or by Tom Clancy. By the way I remember when Clancy was investigated by the Navy for information in "The Hunt For Red October". One of the pilots in my squadron went to High School with him and was questioned by NIS.



Thanks for your post. Since reading your posts from a couple of years ago..your bona fides have never been in question with me. I knew immediately you had been around the block..and several times ..so to speak. A few others too when I see their posts.
I have not had the field experience in sonar as have you or others on thesse threads. Most of mine has been in the yards under construction. Ive spent alot of time on these boats standing hydraulic power plant watchs until the Navy takes over and accepts this system we have put together...bow to stern....keel to the tops of the sail.
I would listen to the electronic techs running these programs as they do their checks and tune ups on the sonar systems. Most of these too were 688 class boats. They would run this recording over and over as they made thier adjustments and monitored the systems. The sound would reverberate back to the stern of the hull where I was standing my watchs ...night after night.
After about two or three weeks of this sound...the light bulb went off in my head. I was floored by the revelation of what I had realized.
No one has actually told me...about this..and like you I dont exactly know what is classified today or not...but I will treat it as such out of respect for the number of sailors I know who are seving at sea and the perils to which they are subject....and of course the flag of this nation.

I recall when I first knew we were doing those tile jobs on the hulls of the 688 class boats. I also knew it was being done on earlier class boats in other yards.
But I understood it was a confidential/classified job. Hence my surprise to find it was in Tom Clancys book "The Hunt for Red October.

Thanks for your post and also your service to this nation.

Orangetom




posted on Oct, 24 2006 @ 02:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3
What do you make of Akulas in the Indian Ocean Darksided? (presuming you're Australian)
Because the Agosta 90B PN subs are rumored to have AIP and I doubt the IN Scorpenes are going to have the same.
The AIP subs(probably 1 and maybe 3) will pose a major threat for the IN surface fleet.


The Indian Navy Akula's are still rumors, but mostly speculated to be a sure thing. The Indian Navy is making a lot of headway in blue ocean deployments, whether it was the 4 ship group that not only tracked Chinese Sovermenny class deliveries but also made a worthy appearance outside Lebanon for evacuations this summer, to the eastern pacific excursions to monitor Australian peacekeepers in East Timor. Nuclear power will help these types of Surface Group deployments, because their Kilo's, while formidable, aren't really built for long patrols.

I am not current on the Indian Navy Scorpene purchase, but as of March 06 I thought I saw somewhere they were looking for AIP on their last three Scorpene's, specifically the MESMA AIP system used in the Agosta 90B PN.

I agree the Agusta's pose a threat to the IN, but I don't see Pakistan in a legitimate arms race at sea with the Indian Navy. The Indian Navy is enormous, growing like a weed, and supported by one of the fastest gorwing modern Air Forces in the world. 1 AIP submarine based on a cold war era hull design doesn't counterbalance that.

What I'll be watching is what the PN does next. It will be interesting to see if the PN goes for the Yuan, Marlin, or U214 to replace their Daphne and Agosta-70s. I think the Yuan makes more sense strategically, but tactically, no AIP submarine is in the same league as the U214.

From what I understand, only the 3rd Agusta 90B for Pakistan will be AIP, and it deploys the MESMA AIP system. I'm personally not all that high on MESMA, because while MESMA can provide higher output power than the other alternatives, its inherent efficiency is the lowest of the four AIP candidates on the market, and its rate of oxygen consumption is correspondingly higher.

That means two things, first it reduces the top speed of AIP underwater, which isn't a big deal, but it also increases the power usage as lower 'cruise' speeds, reducing its total range.

Things to remember about AIP. AIP is about propulsion, not sound. While AIP has fewer moving parts than DE or Nuke, it doesn't give it some unique advantage over either in sound discussions, as sound underwater is controlled by other factors. AIP is about endurance, not speed. Typical AIP cruise speeds are between 3-6 knots, depending upon AIP type. In order to get the expected 20 days out of the MESMA AIP system, cruise speed for the Agusta is only about 4 knots over 15 days. By comparison, the U-214 cruise speed is about 5 knots over 15 days underwater. In operations, speed is even further reduced, so an Agusta manuevers on target between 2-3 knots, the same for a U-214, except the Agusta uses more power to do it with MESMA.

Operations for an AIP sub are different from a nuke or a DE, which is why still today the top 2 conventional submarines in the world are Diesel Electric, not AIP, specifically the Oyashio class and the Collins class. The German U-212 would be #3.

I imagine 3-4 knots would be hard to stomach against the IN, which can field multiple fast moving surface action strike groups that would be nearly impossible to run down without giving away the subs position. Think about it, at 4 knots it takes almost 8 days to go from Karachi, Pakistan to Panaji, India. That would be hard to stomach during a shooting war, but the PN captain would have to do it if he wants to have enough power to remain underwater, unheard, and blockade that port under stealth. As you can see, the tactical challanges don't get easier with AIP, but with patience, the tactical options can be more flexible than their Diesel Electric counterpart.

BTW, that last statement regarding tactical use of conventional submarines is why I think India wants Akula's. There is something to be said about a sub that can stay underwater for as long as their is food for the crew, and weapons to deploy.


[edit on 24-10-2006 by darksided]



posted on Oct, 24 2006 @ 02:27 PM
link   
Jimc4599,

These convergence zones would completely ruin my theory on using the super sonar I talked about in shallow water huh. Damn back to the drawing board. So in your opinion, Orangetom too, what would be the best defense against these littoral diesel subs. I'm begining to figure out why subs don't generaly use their active sonar other than the obvious, gives away position. Can you give me some more clues for me to figure it out. Would be a nice destraction while at work. A mystery to ponder.



posted on Oct, 24 2006 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by BASSPLYR
what would be the best defense against these littoral diesel subs.


The US Navy is approaching the problem with 2 new systems, the Advanced Deployment System (ADS) and the Sea Talon UUV.

The ADS is basically a series of nodes that communicate with each other, sortof like a net, that track sound (or the absence of it) in areas within the net, and uploads the data via a wireless datalink to a command node. It is a passive system that can be deployed by ship or aircraft.

The Sea Talon is a Unmanned Underwater Vehicle that can tow either an active source or passive source sonar array, the same way a traditional towed array sonar works off warships. By using active source on UUVs, it allows the Navy to move active source to an offboard platform, which can help locate submarines in the littoral in support of additional offboard sonar systems, whether towed sonar arrays from Unmanned Surface Vehicles like the Preditor or Spartan, or dipping sonars from USVs or aircraft.

This allows crewed platforms to operate either at standoff ranges aboard a warship using a RUM-139B, which is basically a VLS launched torpedo, or a helicopter armed with a torpedo.

The ADS and Sea Talon projects are both part of the LCS ASW mission module, and additionally are apart of modules currently being designed for the SSGNs.

Using unmanned vehicles and the deployable networked sensor nets are new concepts in Anti-Submarine warfare, and both specific platforms are first of series models. It will be interesting to watch both concepts evolve, and what other systems spawn from these ideas.



posted on Oct, 24 2006 @ 04:31 PM
link   
seriously, i'd rather see Bin Ladin sitting in a big rocket go to the moon!



posted on Oct, 24 2006 @ 06:20 PM
link   
Darksided,

>>
The ADS is basically a series of nodes that communicate with each other, sortof like a net, that track sound (or the absence of it) in areas within the net, and uploads the data via a wireless datalink to a command node. It is a passive system that can be deployed by ship or aircraft.
>>

Whoopity Doo Dah. 30-80km worth of range extension to an LCS over a 'wireless network' (who do they think they are /Sprint/?) means nothing. Especially as it's also likely omni UHF or low C. Does anyone truly believe that you're NOT going to see 'can you hear me now' problems within ten years if we don't go directional satcomms? Jamming or Exploiting the network after 'looking for the trace' relative to a hull-presence 50nm radius search is just too easy.

>>
The Sea Talon is a Unmanned Underwater Vehicle that can tow either an active source or passive source sonar array, the same way a traditional towed array sonar works off warships. By using active source on UUVs, it allows the Navy to move active source to an offboard platform, which can help locate submarines in the littoral in support of additional offboard sonar systems, whether towed sonar arrays from Unmanned Surface Vehicles like the Preditor or Spartan, or dipping sonars from USVs or aircraft.
>>

Unnh Huh. And why does this image-

www.spacewar.com...

Look like something that was sunk by the Monaghan on December 7th? No speed. No true autonomous comms link (digital gertrude or LIDAR) to a SURFACE sender. No HUNTING capabilities. Not even what I would call a useful configuration for autonomous sea-dock in a liftable garage (which would vastly simplify any helo recovery system for fast transit and turn redeployment).

>>
This allows crewed platforms to operate either at standoff ranges aboard a warship using a RUM-139B, which is basically a VLS launched torpedo, or a helicopter armed with a torpedo.
>>

Oh Boyee! Just like a I said, /ASROC/. Of course they've 'doubled the range' from 8nm to 15nm. But then even the cheapest lameass rocket-Exocet is now a 40 vice 21nm ranged weapon SO YOU'RE STILL OPERATING WITHIN THE FIRING ENVELOPE OF THE THREAT!

Since you haven't weaponized the UUV and we /retired/ (like the idea will die if the system isn't present) CAPTOR, this is the equivalent of swinging a sword in the middle of a rifle range because NO SUB is going to close to torpedo distance if it can loft AShM and scoot.

Indeed, if they can make a creepsy traipsy 'UUV' patrol bot, how long before they can take things even further (and dumber/simpler) by bussing either the SCT or Missile in on a slow-approach encapsulate like a Dive Scooter-

www.scubacenter.com...

So that the sub can eject a bunch of these things from upwards of a 100nm out and then have 'someone' (far away and unexposed) SIGNAL them 'on the hour' with target coordinates and launch codes to fire-forward ANOTHER 50-100nm into the inshore anchorage? It's not like Iran hasn't already buzzed our business with UAVs.

Which is why the whole conop of -pretending- that it's 'okay' to only risk a 225 million dollar LCS because you are using a ten foot pole to do your mine clearance before you bring in the CVSF is moronic.

Because you fail to acknowledge the immediate 'next step' which makes your ten foot pole sub-as-mine clearance effort look REAL DUMB as the threat force translates to directionals. And there isn't thing-one your stupid inshore fashion statement can do about it.

Read My Lips: THE ONLY WAY TO WIN THE WHITE WATER WAR IS NOT TO FIGHT IT.

COE to the max.

That way, whatever you put inshore is little more than an offensive trip wire of _your own time and place choosing_, past which the threat has to bring his primary mission platform -seawards- to play in the big scary blue where the real sharks live.

THINK people. You don't risk a baby carriage in the middle of a highway by putting orange cones and flag waivers around it.

You don't risk a 5 billion dollar carrier by bringing it inshore like this was 1968 off Yankee Station. Ever.

IF THE CARRIER AIN'T THERE BECAUSE IT'S AIRWING DOESN'T NEED IT TO BE THEN WHY IS THE NAVY!?

>>
The ADS and Sea Talon projects are both part of the LCS ASW mission module, and additionally are apart of modules currently being designed for the SSGNs.
>>

Plug'n'Play without the doctrinal commit and funds to make a usefully working force architecture (i.e. the teeth within the gaping jaws) ends up with COTS testbed crap like this.

Granny gums her food, the Navy should not.

>>
Using unmanned vehicles and the deployable networked sensor nets are new concepts in Anti-Submarine warfare, and both specific platforms are first of series models. It will be interesting to watch both concepts evolve, and what other systems spawn from these ideas.
>>

A billion here. A billion there. It's not like it's /your money/...


KPl.

[edit on 24-10-2006 by ch1466]



posted on Oct, 24 2006 @ 07:05 PM
link   
I agree that the ADA thingy or whatever it is is basically like a mini-portable and deployable SOSUS net. But that is old news and every country has had plenty of time to develope a counter stratagy against it by now. THe hunter killer drones sounds like a decent idea, but it sounds expensive and with the current level of AI secret govt or public I don't think it would be as effective as a person piloting the vehicle hopefully via remote. But then someone is going to hack into the frequency and start doing what they want with the UUV. So maybe still not a great idea.

What happened to captor mines by the way. WHy did we take them out of service? Just curious.

So, the diesle subs will kill anything that gets near their countries coast or designated choke point.
Active sonar is no good cause of the convergence zone mess it would create.
Any cheap anti ship missile or rocket will kill the fleet if it gets too close to the shore, and are easy to depoly close to the enemy via small fast attack boats.
Our subs can't manuver close enough effectivly and have no real advantage and a lot of disadvantages in shallow water.

You are right, unless we have an ace up our sleeve to counter this sort of threat, there isn't currently a way to safely engage these littoral areas with an aceptable loss margin.

SO any ideas as to what the US is trying to do about it, or any other country for that matter?

My best option is to sneak the NR1 in there and use it's robotic arm to grab enemy diesels when they wonder too close. Or maybe the NR1 can take out the enemy sub fleet HMS Turtle style and use it's robotic arm to attach hull mines. JK So what can be done to counter this?



posted on Oct, 24 2006 @ 07:22 PM
link   
I have a Yes or No question for both Orangetom and Jim. Please tell me that the US navy is not sitting on their keasters and letting themselves slip behind in naval technology and weapon systems.

So my question is this. Yes or No from your knowledge, is the US navy working on or posses any kind of new technology that can counter this sort of threat or anything really cool that would definantly put us back in the naval lead if we ever were. You don't have to go into detail or comprimise yourself or any oaths you have taken. Although ya can if ya want to. Or point me in the right direction if you can. I just need a yes or no answer so that I can keep my faith in the US Navy, or should I start rooting for the Indian navy instead.



posted on Oct, 24 2006 @ 11:49 PM
link   
I've also got a question on the question "have you heard...sonor". My question is"what DID I hear?".

I was stationed on CV-66 between '80-'84. I wasn't running the battlegroup or anything like it, I was a AK3 in charge of some flammable liquids storerooms. Bear in mind that CV-66 was the only CV built with a bow sonor. I did have Mike Walker of the Walker spy ring on a working party of mine, tho! He was with VAW-123 at the time. Should have worked the sucker to death and not given him a smoke break!!!!


One of the storerooms (now in 16,000 ft deep of Atlantic Ocean) was way back aft on the port side of the ship. I just always assumed that it was in proximity to one of the port-side screws (above it )and that there was ocean on the other side of the port bulkhead. When they poared on the coal, it got noisy in the 'room with a rushing, swishing, roar. The port bulkhead was always cold and had condensation on it that I could not keep off. I was constantly having to chip paint and re-primer and paint because of rust from the condensation. When the ship slowed down, I could hear a crackle and pop similar to hot fat in fryer. I assumed it was flow-noise as the ship "coasted". OK, so much for background.

Occasionally I would hear a series of four "chirps", each pitched higher than the previous. It sounded almost bird-like. Always in series of four. Never any "BAWAAAAH". I assumed it was sonor of somekind. Anybody got any ideas. The sound only came through the port bulkhead. Tom? Jim?



posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 08:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by st3ve_o
how do the british 'astute class' subs compare when they enter service??


Although any direct comparison is highly classified. It is well known that british subs have a good reputation for being quiet and there is little reason to suggest that they will not be at similar noise levels to the viginia class (i think seawolf class type levels might be pushing it for the uk at the moment). It has been stated on this board before that certain people in the US navy base in Scotland used to joke that all uk subs ever did was drive out the clyde and then sit on the bottom, because they used to just dissappear!

AIP tech is a major area of research in many countries and the pace of development is huge. So while the nuclear boats beat out the AIP ones currently on endurance and speed, this may not always be the case.

It is well worth keeping an eye on this subject area.

Paperplane_uk



posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by BASSPLYR
I have a Yes or No question for both Orangetom and Jim. Please tell me that the US navy is not sitting on their keasters and letting themselves slip behind in naval technology and weapon systems.

So my question is this. Yes or No from your knowledge, is the US navy working on or posses any kind of new technology that can counter this sort of threat or anything really cool that would definantly put us back in the naval lead if we ever were. You don't have to go into detail or comprimise yourself or any oaths you have taken. Although ya can if ya want to. Or point me in the right direction if you can. I just need a yes or no answer so that I can keep my faith in the US Navy, or should I start rooting for the Indian navy instead.


I'm still trying to figure out if these subs are the threat they are being made out to be. The only advantage that they have is their ability to go totally silent for several hours. They have a short range, limited speed endurence, and from what I understand, short deployment times.

With these limitations in mind it should be fairly easy to eliminate them as a threat. Everybody keeps focusing on the subs themselves and forgets the big picture. If you can't kill the sub, kill it's support structure.

This AIP system needs specialized fuel and support systems to sustain itself. This requires the sub to either return to port or meet with a tender. If you destroy the support facilities or sink the tenders, the sub is going to have a rough time. Nuclear subs have their problems but this isn't one of them. All that is needed to support them is a cargo ship with a small crane. I have seen where an attack sub has been tied between two surface ships for replentishment.

The CAPTOR mine is alive and well. They can be placed where and when they are needed. It would be kind of interesting to seed a harbor with CAPTORs after the subs have left it. One thing worth mentioning is that with the new rotary launcher a B-2 can deploy CAPTORs.



posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 12:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by paperplane_uk

Originally posted by st3ve_o
how do the british 'astute class' subs compare when they enter service??


Although any direct comparison is highly classified. It is well known that british subs have a good reputation for being quiet and there is little reason to suggest that they will not be at similar noise levels to the viginia class (i think seawolf class type levels might be pushing it for the uk at the moment). It has been stated on this board before that certain people in the US navy base in Scotland used to joke that all uk subs ever did was drive out the clyde and then sit on the bottom, because they used to just dissappear!

AIP tech is a major area of research in many countries and the pace of development is huge. So while the nuclear boats beat out the AIP ones currently on endurance and speed, this may not always be the case.

It is well worth keeping an eye on this subject area.

Paperplane_uk


Agree with paperplane here. Our cousins across the pond and our industrys have shared certain technologys and advances since before WW2. The Merlin powered engine of the P 51 fighter plane is a prime example. What we know about quieting the Brits also know. Remember the Brits also have boomers similar to the Ohio Class fitted out to their specifications and needs. Their methods of operations.
The Brits are very strict dicipliniarians in their Navys and thier submarine fleet .with officers trained in the Perisher Courses. This is a very difficult course to pass. Not many officers make the grade or are even invited to even attend this course. Failure rates for this submarine course are high. Even outsiders seldom have the opportunity to be invited to attend this course with a limited number of openings.
What I am saying is that inspite of technology and technology transfers...it is still a great amount of crew training and dicipline which makes a boat work and maintain its abilities. Particularly in the "Think Quiet" arena. Crew training and dicipline can be everything here at the moment of truth ...in spite of all this high tech.

I think AIP will never be up to the endurance/speed levels of nuclear power... but no doubt advances will be made in this arena. Both us here in the States and in Britian will be closely watching these advances .

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by BASSPLYR
I have a Yes or No question for both Orangetom and Jim. Please tell me that the US navy is not sitting on their keasters and letting themselves slip behind in naval technology and weapon systems.

So my question is this. Yes or No from your knowledge, is the US navy working on or posses any kind of new technology that can counter this sort of threat or anything really cool that would definantly put us back in the naval lead if we ever were. You don't have to go into detail or comprimise yourself or any oaths you have taken. Although ya can if ya want to. Or point me in the right direction if you can. I just need a yes or no answer so that I can keep my faith in the US Navy, or should I start rooting for the Indian navy instead.


BASSPLAYR,

Yes.We are always working on new technology. ALWAYS!! I will remind the readers once again....When the fleet comes back..you see the family and reporters on the surface fleet piers ..all the hoopla cameras etc etc for the evening news storys.
You very very seldom see the cameras or public at the submarine piers. This is very telliing if you think it through. This means that similar to poker...you may show your kings , queens and jacks..you hold your aces very close. Think about what this means.


I'll give you this one since it is on the web and I have posted on it before.
I am not sure about the process of puttng up the link but type in

LSV 2 CUTTHROAT

Put this in on a search engine. It is a large scale remote control submarine being used for research in a lake out west.
I was priveleged to see this set up while riding a bicycle outside the back of one of the buildings and it was being prepared for ship out to the Navy one night. I wheeled my bicycle around and pedaled right over to get a look. It took a few minutes to get over my shock when I realized what I was looking at. This is a very expensive test vehicle used for this kind of research.

So you see..the research never ends. This is just a new tool in the research.

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by JIMC5499

Originally posted by BASSPLYR
I have a Yes or No question for both Orangetom and Jim. Please tell me that the US navy is not sitting on their keasters and letting themselves slip behind in naval technology and weapon systems.

So my question is this. Yes or No from your knowledge, is the US navy working on or posses any kind of new technology that can counter this sort of threat or anything really cool that would definantly put us back in the naval lead if we ever were. You don't have to go into detail or comprimise yourself or any oaths you have taken. Although ya can if ya want to. Or point me in the right direction if you can. I just need a yes or no answer so that I can keep my faith in the US Navy, or should I start rooting for the Indian navy instead.


I'm still trying to figure out if these subs are the threat they are being made out to be. The only advantage that they have is their ability to go totally silent for several hours. They have a short range, limited speed endurence, and from what I understand, short deployment times.

With these limitations in mind it should be fairly easy to eliminate them as a threat. Everybody keeps focusing on the subs themselves and forgets the big picture. If you can't kill the sub, kill it's support structure.

This AIP system needs specialized fuel and support systems to sustain itself. This requires the sub to either return to port or meet with a tender. If you destroy the support facilities or sink the tenders, the sub is going to have a rough time. Nuclear subs have their problems but this isn't one of them. All that is needed to support them is a cargo ship with a small crane. I have seen where an attack sub has been tied between two surface ships for replentishment.

The CAPTOR mine is alive and well. They can be placed where and when they are needed. It would be kind of interesting to seed a harbor with CAPTORs after the subs have left it. One thing worth mentioning is that with the new rotary launcher a B-2 can deploy CAPTORs.


Bingo..in the X Ring.

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 01:02 PM
link   
Great point about the big picture of Littoral warfare. THose subs gotta go home, and frequently. Bomb the crap out of their support and it will hurt them immensly.

First take out their supplies and fuel for the boats, probably for alot of other stuff they need it for too.

Take out their support ships so that they can't get help from them and are forced to go home to port every time they need something, which will be often.

Either blow up the ports which I wouldn't want to do, or for more fun start picking off the diesels as they scramble for home, and themselves can't manuver. Word will get around. The boats either won't leave port and will be useless and easy targets if we decide to punish the offending nation, or they can can just sit on the ocean floor until they die, cause surfacing at that point will mean getting blown up and certain death.

Glad that captor mines are still doing well and evolving to meet todays threats. Would be nice to put a port on lock down with some of these.

Hoping we are still the best sub fleet around, Although the UK has always been pretty first rate.

Whats going on with NR1-NR2 and any of it's decendents. Still think we should use them to sneak up on the snoozing diesels and grab it with it's robotic arm . Maybe be cocky and drag a metal tow line that is anchored to some big underwater rock near the screws of the sessile diesels and snag em like a maruading crab or lobster. I could see it now "Hey! THeres the American fleet lets get em! Full speed ahead! Screws get fouled. WHAAAA!!!" JK bad naval humor.

What are some of the more interesting projects we are working on for our sub fleet?

Also any more clues as to why subs don't use active sonar other than the fact it would devulge it's location to the enemy.



posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 01:18 PM
link   
Thanks for your input guys. My faith is now restored in the US navy. THe cutthroat...I must look into this, sounds pretty interesting.

I agree subs are our aces, and are probably the test bed for some very advanced technology.

Great idea to have the B-2 be able to deploy captors. We could do it secretly and the enemy would never know it. a few months later they act up activate their fleet and they will suddenly realise that they are in the middle of a very lethal and hopless mine field.

Still gotta ask any clues as to why we don't use active sonar. I know the obvious reason, but I'm willing to bet there is another reason that is probably simple but not commonly thought about. Maybe Giant Squid don't like it and neither do whales they've gone crazy and are attacking anything that uses active sonar. JK again.



posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 01:18 PM
link   
Thanks for your input guys. My faith is now restored in the US navy. THe cutthroat...I must look into this, sounds pretty interesting.

I agree subs are our aces, and are probably the test bed for some very advanced technology.

Great idea to have the B-2 be able to deploy captors. We could do it secretly and the enemy would never know it. a few months later they act up activate their fleet and they will suddenly realise that they are in the middle of a very lethal and hopless mine field.

Still gotta ask any clues as to why we don't use active sonar. I know the obvious reason, but I'm willing to bet there is another reason that is probably simple but not commonly thought about. Maybe Giant Squid don't like it and neither do whales they've gone crazy and are attacking anything that uses active sonar. JK again.



posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by BASSPLYR
Still gotta ask any clues as to why we don't use active sonar. I know the obvious reason, but I'm willing to bet there is another reason that is probably simple but not commonly thought about. Maybe Giant Squid don't like it and neither do whales they've gone crazy and are attacking anything that uses active sonar. JK again.


We don't use active sonar that much because the bad guys can hear it from much further away than we can detect them with it. With some of the smart anti-ship missiles out there these days all that is needed for targeting is a line of bearing and an approximate range. A ship pinging with active sonar can give that info to a sub a hundred miles away.

The UK's Trafalger class boats are basically first flight 688's with some modifications to allow the use of standard Royal Navy equipment. This isn't a slight against the Brits. They helped with the design of the 688's. Some of the original design work was done at HMS Dolphin.



posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 08:27 PM
link   
Thanks for all the info lately. I used to be infatuated with subs as a kid, life caught up and I couldn't study up as much, now that I've got an opportunity I'd love to pick both your brains for anything new to get me all excited about subs again.

I still got a feeling that there are more reasons to not using active sonar than that. Although a small ping could probably be heard all the way across the globe. Not a good thing.

The cutthroat seems to be up to something. It's hiding some really interesting tech that they are being really vauge on. Magnetic motors, and Physics experiments besides a whole slurry of other things. Magnetic Motors-Advanced MHD or even more profoundly cooler? Physics experiments-remotlessly recharging batteries from halfway around the planet?
Ehhh...Am I getting warmer, or just another victim to disinfo?



posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 09:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5
Yeah we got owned alright…

HMS Gotland
050627-N-0685S-003 San Diego, Ca. (June 27, 2005) – The Swedish diesel-powered attack submarine HMS Gotland arrives in San Diego on a transport ship from Sweden.


It looks to me like they are too small to cross the ocean by themselves.


But do you know the most effective way to sink a Swedish attack sub?


.........Put it in the water!!!



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join