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.
Originally posted by devilwasp
best sailors? hmm i think the austrailian and british perisher courses might have something to say about that.
now let me see best trained captains in the ocean at least nuclear boat captains and of course that makes our captains inferior to yours?
and the austrailian deisel captains are of course inferoir even though the US owns no diesel subs?
Originally posted by devilwasp
also your 50 years of carriers is a bit stupid, firstly jets didnt appear untill end of ww2 and proper carrier versions didnt reach until what the 50's? and even then they were sub sonic.
Originally posted by devilwasp
also you have the biggest carriers big deal the bigger the carrier the bigger the target. you knnow a kilo can disable a carrier in the right conditions and thats with the carrier being ready and prepped for war and with the battle group ready to go.know how? one single torp on the prop. that carrier will most likely have drive shaft damage and cause it to be in refit for months.
Originally posted by devilwasp
hell if needed just use a nuke on them and the group will be decimated. also your great ASW units use sinking helicopters. by sinking i mean no bouyancy in them.
Originally posted by IAF101
Who buillt the first nuclear submarine in the world? Who taught the British ( forget the Australians, I can't be bothered) to build nuclear submarines?
Who defeated the Japanese navy even though half the USNs Pacific Fleet was out of commission? Hmm, could it be the British !! No, they were busy drowning in the South China Sea after getting spanked by the Japanese Navy. A Glorious naval empire it was wasn't it?( Sorry, don't mean to be hateful!!)
The USN doesn't use deisel subs because, firstly they are old technology( Cold war era) and secondly most importantly, the missions for which the diesel boats are best-suited have vanished from planning since the end of the Cold War. DSs( Deisel subs) are well suited to defending friendly ports and lurking off enemy ports, waiting for enemy vessels to present themselves as targets. Now there is no enemy to defend friendly ports against, nor are there enemy ships to ambush. Current naval missions are rapid-intervention operations, which take place in distant places on short notice. DSs lack the sustained high speed capability required to reach the scene of an operation in a timely manner. If the submarine can't get there, it simply isn't useful. Even the focus on "littoral operations" doesn't mean DSs are the solution: those littorals are scattered all over the world, far from where the submarines are based. A small-ish SSN can work in the littorals nearly as well as an DS, and it can get there quickly.
So , when we had DSs the USN had the best DS captains, now the Australians can take first place.
Who says you need to have jets otherwise it isn't an aircraft carrier? The name itself suggests that the ship carrier aircrafts ( air- craft- carrier :duh. The 50 years I was refering to was the development of aircraft carriers irrespective of their aircraft.(1940-2004) i.e 60 years
I know that a kilo can disable a carrier but my question is who is foolish enough to mess with the USN--Nobody. The repercussions would be incomprehensible, we lose one carrier they lose their country!!
To attack a carrier group when it was battle ready a submarine would have to overcome detection from :
1) a destroyer, usually Spruance-class � primarily for anti-submarine warfare (ASW)
2) a frigate, usually Oliver Hazard Perry-class � primarily for anti-submarine warfare (ASW)
3) two attack submarines, usually Los Angeles-class � in a direct support role seeking out and destroying hostile surface ships and submarines
www.fact-index.com...
Which is highly improbable with a deisel kilo class sub.
Also why does a helicopter need boyancy ??
Originally posted by devilwasp
yeah and who taught you to drive your diesels which all nuclear tactics where derived from?
oh yeah ever heard of the kreigs marine? sorta largeish navy with some very high tech , we kinda kicked thier asses and also if your navy so great then why didnt you notice a very large japanese carrier fleet sail across pacific round the world to kick your asses at pearl (no offence to the sailors/soldiers and airmen and women there that died)
a smallish SSN? do you know how big the nuclear reactor is??
yeah and who invented the first bloody aircraft carrier that you copied IDIOT WE DID!
who is foolish enough to mess with them? oh wow the USN thats a real threat if they lose a carrier, they lose a carrier they run and rethink tactics allowing you to make more ambushes. yeah and your great navy decide weather to bomb iraqi "insurgent strongholds" or light houses!
Also why does a helicopter need boyancy ??
1) any of the above wont find the sub if it is on the ocean floor
2) they wont find it if its under 8 knots.
3) the great USN always finds enemy subs in thier pack during war games , although mostly nuclear i have heard of tales of deisels slipping through.
and "Also why does a helicopter need boyancy ??" OMG that really shows how much the USN cares for its sailors, what happens if it ditches eh? oh your going to get out the window sure after its sunk like 20 feet. those things sink like bricks. bouyancy helps keep it afloat to get the crew out and time for you to hide in if needed. hell the sea king can stay afloat for an hour before it starts to sink. im not going to sit and debate a pointless arguemnt both RN and USN are good in thier own respects the RN is more ASW the USN is more anti air and anti surface ships ,since the RN's role in NATO is to provide ASW while america takes sea and air. to get back on topic is china only going ot build one carrier or many? if so any diffrent plans.
[edit on 25-10-2004 by devilwasp]
Originally posted by COOL HAND
We taught ourselves. We were the first ones to couple a battery to a sub and to use an combustion engine on one.
Sigh, obviously you forgot the part where the real threat from the Germans was their subs. Who sunk more of them?
As far as the Pearl Harbor attack. you might want to research that topic before accusing us of missing the entire fleet. You comments make you look like a rambling fool.
Do you? You'd be surprised at the size.
Wrong, try research next time.
You have insight into US navy tactics because??? You base this on???
Those were my favorites. I won't even touch them, I will just laugh at them. Seriously, where do you get your info from????
No wait, that paragraph was better.
Where are they going to hide in a sinking helicopter?
Originally posted by Russian
Originally posted by Nerdling
And russian stuff is a copy of western stuff.
UH?
HAHAHAHA!
Now that is FUNNY.
Russians dont copy westerns.
They make their own to fight back.
Give me a couple of things Russians coped.
Please if you do NOT know the do NOT say anything.
That way people will think you are smarter.
Out,
Russian
Originally posted by blitzkrieg
Originally posted by craigandrew
But it was this PLA-N base in the Indian ocean that peaked my interests.
...."China is building an Indian Ocean presence in the Coco Islands in the Bay of Bengal by upgrading the naval base on Hianggyi Island as well as building a Signals Intelligence facility on Great Coco Island. This facility will allow the Chinese tomonitor the activities of the Indian Navy. This has prompted an Indian response to expand its naval activities and interests into the South China Sea with multilateral and unilateral excercises" (didnt someone just say they participated in an Air Exercise with Singapore on another thread)
China might have no reason for war today with India, but ten, twenty years down the track the whole thing might be different. China has interests in a common boarder and a sense of ....whatever over ethnic Chinese in the region. IF an war DID occur then a flanking Naval assault could add another string to Chinas bow.
The article finished up...
"Nonetheless, China has successfully made use of grandiose diplomatic posturing and bullying to promote the perception of a powerful threat when in reality its capabilities are very limited beyond its coastal regions"
Cheers