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.

 

China launches new type of sub, American intelligence "suprised"

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 19 2004 @ 03:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
dont think your subs are invinceable. cause they sure as hell are not,also counter measures wont stop a wire guided torpedo or the new versions of torpedo'.


It is hard to change their believe unless they can go back school and fill
their head more knowledge. Otherwise they think everything they own
is fiction like the Holleywood films.




posted on Jul, 19 2004 @ 04:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by AD5673
The Chinese cant even come close to the naval technologies of Russia and America. Thoguh America has aneough money to fund them Russia only has little to fund on one project. But the plans drawn up for them are equipped witht he best technology in the world (probably).


What I think is that China use Russian thechnologies to build this sub. They allready took many tech of owers, so I think may be russian saling tech to them or russia work with them together.



posted on Jul, 19 2004 @ 06:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp

Originally posted by WestPoint23
They don't work like once in a million uses plus countermeasures are a good defense if you are caught by surprise and if china has nuclear subs then they would be as loud or louder then ours and we could track and hunt them down


dont think your subs are invinceable. cause they sure as hell are not,also counter measures wont stop a wire guided torpedo or the new versions of torpedo'.


I don't think they are invincible I just think they are better than most subs out there a new version of a torpedo or wire guided torpedo and china has these technologies
even if they do even if they have the most sophisticated tech in the world which they don't they still wont be able to sink out 7 carrier groups and they wont sink all our subs



posted on Jul, 19 2004 @ 11:04 AM
link   
no not all just enough for the american public to cry " sign a peace agreement or cease fire"



posted on Jul, 19 2004 @ 12:13 PM
link   
Yeah right the US government would care what the people say plus this would be another pearl harbor cuz they would be attacking our carriers without a declaration of war and they would be doing it for no reason and devil do you know how many congress men and how many US citizens cried out for a cease fire after pearl harbor 0 that's right zero just like after 9/11 no one opposed the war in Afghanistan so china would be digging its own grave cuz the US would not stop till it won an unconventional surrender



posted on Jul, 19 2004 @ 12:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
devil do you know how many congress men and how many US citizens cried out for a cease fire after pearl harbor 0 that's right zero just like after 9/11 no one opposed the war in Afghanistan so china would be digging its own grave cuz the US would not stop till it won an unconventional surrender



You might want to do some research into that statement of yours before you go shooting your mouth off again.

Not everyone in Congress voted for WW II or for the war against Afghanistan.

Its called research and you might want to look into it. Deny Ignorance, don't drown in it.



posted on Jul, 19 2004 @ 03:11 PM
link   
This China-US topic is still doing the rounds I see.

I’m sure China's tech very capable and will only get better but to suggest it could take on American at this stage is absurd.

Technical innovation is not simple a function of time but can be very rapid over short periods of time. Graphically it would look like a step function e.g The initial implementation of F-15 followed by F18 ….. F22. At present China’s military technology is growing very rapidly because it is easier to catch up (marginal rates of innovation).

China will never maintain current rates of technical innovation – I doubt they will ever take over the US.

As someone has suggested “sh1t happens” – China would obviously win some battles but would not win a war.



posted on Jul, 19 2004 @ 03:20 PM
link   
Hawkssss - ive done some research and found this

US club is and always will be bigger than China's




Bibliography

www.bigstickstoday.com
www.janesclubs.com
www.strategyclubs.com

(btw - dam sick of cut and paste propaganda)



posted on Jul, 19 2004 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vanguard
As someone has suggested “sh1t happens” – China would obviously win some battles but would not win a war.

Can you remind me the war China lost after 1949?
I know US recent Wars on Iraq and Afganistan is still succeeding.



posted on Jul, 19 2004 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Yeah right the US government would care what the people say plus this would be another pearl harbor cuz they would be attacking our carriers without a declaration of war and they would be doing it for no reason and devil do you know how many congress men and how many US citizens cried out for a cease fire after pearl harbor 0 that's right zero just like after 9/11 no one opposed the war in Afghanistan so china would be digging its own grave cuz the US would not stop till it won an unconventional surrender


CHINA WOULD ATTACK YOUR CARRIERS AFTER WAR HAD BEEN DECLARED SO THATS DONE. and no one cried out for peace because every one was angry at a suprise attack un called for agression. actually if the US lost several thousand sailors on a carrier then i think the gov might reconsider using carriers cause of loss of life and thier job can be done by smaller cheaper better carriers.



posted on Jul, 19 2004 @ 04:39 PM
link   
It indeed seems the new sub, a lot of technology looks like derived form
Kilo, even the shape of the hull. But one of the key feature, the AIP tech
is absolutely not from Russia, because Russia is also just recently begin
to equip their diesel sub with AIP systems.

About tech innovation, this problem is related with Money, so not so easy.
If you have experience of R&D, you will know when you begin, you can go
many directions, or many routes, but after you tried a lot possibilities, you
will can finally figure out the most possible and most effective way.
Innovation is high risky because most of the money will be spend in vain,
and only US has so much resource and can afford it.

China is a poor country, can not afford so big expense, so the most
effective and economic way is follow other people's successful story, so
at least you will not go into a wrong way, and waste your precious
resource and money.

I have a friend working in an inistitue, he once had an idea and talked
with the managers, but finally his idea got denied because no other
country in the world has tried such kind of idea, the managers don't know
how big risk it will be and their decision is very conservative. Later my
friend found in a paper that US is doing research that using completely
the same idea with him and has got some achievement, so they hurrily
rush to that area. My friend once talk with me and said, if we do this
research at beginning, we will be world leader of this area, but we wasted
precious 5 years.

I think if we have more money and can afford going into wrong way,
then I think the government will more encourage people to try different
ideas, and you will see more innovation that will come from China.



posted on Jul, 19 2004 @ 04:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by zcheng
Can you remind me the war China lost after 1949?
I know US recent Wars on Iraq and Afganistan is still succeeding.



Hmm, I seem to recall you loosing a border war with Russia in '69. Your country ended up caving in and requesting peace talks.

Or do you deny that ever happening?



posted on Jul, 19 2004 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by COOL HAND
Hmm, I seem to recall you loosing a border war with Russia in '69. Your country ended up caving in and requesting peace talks.

What I understand is following:
Soviet was massing millitary in Chinese in Mongolia, North East of China, and in the West XinJiang province. China made full preparation for the all-out war. There were skirmishes in the border, can be called attritions at most, not war. It was in this context, China started strategic cooperation with US and eventually brought down the Soviet. That was why US and China relation was quite cozy in the 80's.

Can you help me by pointing the detail of the lost war of China, like time, place, and loss on Chinese side? Thank you.

Do you know other wars lost by China after 1945?



posted on Jul, 19 2004 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
actually if the US lost several thousand sailors on a carrier then i think the gov might reconsider using carriers cause of loss of life and thier job can be done by smaller cheaper better carriers.


This is one actually many people are arguing : is the carrier idea outdated ?
Usually measures and counter-measures are developing simultaeously,
Soviet has developed anti-carrier technology and tacitis for almost 40 years
but they never used their muscles because the world is largely in peace.
We still don't know how a carrier force is standable if it face an Soviet
level attack.
Carrier is a very good combat platform, but the problem is once a carrier
is sunk, the loss will be huge and the impact will also be huge. I guess
the US public may can accept loss hundreds planes but can hardly accept
the loss of a carrier, because carrier force is America's military symbol.
Carrier is good but its political signicance is too big and easy to impact
the psychology of the people, that is its weakness.



posted on Jul, 19 2004 @ 07:04 PM
link   
In the wars the US will face in the future, the carrier is the most important thing anyone could ever have. It provides a roving airbase, aka we don't need treaties with countries to base our aircraft in, something which is very important.

The carrier is not vulnerable when it has 2 Cruisers, 2 destroyers, a frigate, and 2 subs protecting it. We need to stop judging one system on it's own, warfare is all about combined arms.



posted on Jul, 19 2004 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kozzy
In the wars the US will face in the future, the carrier is the most important thing anyone could ever have. It provides a roving airbase, aka we don't need treaties with countries to base our aircraft in, something which is very important.

The carrier is not vulnerable when it has 2 Cruisers, 2 destroyers, a frigate, and 2 subs protecting it. We need to stop judging one system on it's own, warfare is all about combined arms.

no one knows what battle's the US or fellow western nations will face but i agree they are an important role. not just as an airbase but as a mobile operations platform.
also they are exstremely vunerable if they only have that kind of an escort.
a cruiser defeds against surface and air threats , the surface threats are limited and the air threats are limited cause ofthe carriers air arm. the destroyers are handy but only two? seems a bit risky for only two. a single frigate now thats pointless, two or three but come on 1 ? whats it gona do go lone wolf?
the subs dont work well together, there designed to be lone wolf's and there is the risk of friendly fire. but i see the point of haveing a sub near a carrier they are the most effect combat vessel known.



posted on Jul, 19 2004 @ 07:39 PM
link   
Are you kidding? The amount of firepower a those ships can bring to bear is enormous. Crusiers and Destroyers can pretty much deal with any threat, air, sea, or sub. A Frigate is a more specialized ASW platfrom, which is soon to be outdated.

Subs don't operate as lone wolfs, they are intergrated with each other and surface ships.

Add, UAVs, helicopters, recon planes, satellite imagery, radar, and towed sonar. This is a #load of sensor power, that takes some serious tricks to get through.



posted on Jul, 19 2004 @ 08:13 PM
link   
I agree with Kozzy when you factor all of the support vessels and systems that protect a carrier they are impressive also trust me the US would not surrender in a war cuz it lost one carrier if that is how may countries feel they are in for one hell of a time



posted on Jul, 20 2004 @ 06:20 AM
link   
The chances of a carrier being completely destroyed are pretty unlikely too. One might be seriously damaged and return to port for repair. Plus, that's why we have 16 of them.



posted on Jul, 20 2004 @ 09:56 AM
link   
Like a poster said, the other ships in the battle group provide a "net" around the carrier. It would be quite a feat to get through all of the defenses and sink a carrier. One or two missiles will not put a carrier on the bottom. They are designed to take multiple hits and stay afloat.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join