Originally posted by Bearack
Originally posted by ken10
Originally posted by jhn7537
Originally posted by Bearack
Originally posted by Eurisko2012
Originally posted by jhn7537
I think Iran wants this fight and I'm pretty sure they're going to get it....
Yes, Iran can start a fight in the Strait of Hormuz.
Exactly, how many days could they shut down traffic in the Strait of Hormuz? 4 days?
2 weeks? When the short war is over, Irans navy will be 100% destroyed. Then what?
I think this image tells the story!
US 5th Fleet, mind you.
edit on 28-12-2011 by Bearack because: (no reason given)
And thats just a small part of the US Naval fleet... I honestly will never understand why other countries would want to go toe to toe with the US
Military... Do people forget that our country spends nearly $1 trillion each year on building it up???
Yeah, its pretty invincible right.....
The uninvited guest.
That was a flub up for sure. But in fairness, that was the Kitty Hawk which was decommissioned in 2008 (IIRC) and the destroyer class ships that
accompanied the Kitty Hawk also had antiquated radar. That was one of the primary reasons for its decommission. It was also not a super carrier class
or even a Nimitz class carrier for that matter. Let's see a Chinese sub attempt this with the USS Ronald Reagan.
Here is my take, appologies for any errors as I have to keep it short...
The PLAN has sure gotten a lot of mileage out of the Type 039 Diesel/Electric boat commander having the intestinal fortitude to surface in the same
hemisphere as a CVN battlegroup much less within weapons range.
Although ATS would never be accused of letting the facts get in the way of a good story, I would point out a bit more of the obvious that anyone with
a passing interest in the subject should know as well.
The USN SOSUS has had the south pacific wired like a pinball machine for decades. Augmented with relevant SPAWAR system integration and heavily
invested with new passive acoustic technology over the last decade with an eye towards containing a modern PLAN SSBN threat it is a safe bet that the
USN has better intelligence on the disposition and movements of the PLAN submarine fleet at any given time than the PLAN.
As the SSBN leg of the nuclear triad is where the true balance of global power resides, ASW is one of the most highly classified programs in the
military. The USN has a long history of keeping tight lipped in all areas concerning submarine operations. What that means in this context is just
because you don't hear about them, the "silent service" of the USN can be depended upon to be on station and one step ahead of any perceived
ASW is one of those technological arenas where the USN has enjoyed overwhelming superiority in all aspects from technology to operational doctrine for
a very long time with no intention of allowing any other naval force an opportunity for parity in the foreseeable future.
It is a safe guess to bet that current attack submarine doctrine regarding the PLAN submarine fleet is not all that different from what the USN
practiced against the Red Navy during the cold war. The USN attack submarines take advantage of the numerical and technological superiority to pick up
the PLAN boats when they sortie and then shadow them without their knowledge for the duration of the PLAN Diesel/Electric submarines endurance
(another advantage of the multi trillion dollar USN investment in an all nuclear submarine force) Diesel Electric boats such as the Type 039 do not
have the performance or stamina to stalk a U.S. carrier group. The tactics used by a Diesel Electric boat would be more akin to having good
intelligence on the Carriers planned movements and then ambushing the carrier within an existing choke-point
Another overlooked factor lost in the sensationalism of the Kitty Hawk vs.Type 039 story is that all U.S. Carrier groups operate with a group of
usually 2 to 4 attack submarines in the role of ASW picket.
In a nutshell what it all means is a lot of smack talk over a non event for the USN but a brazen and arguably reckless maneuver by the PLAN sub
Inside the Ring/China intelligence gaps
Adm. Timothy J. Keating, the commander of U.S. Pacific Command, told reporters in Hong Kong on Feb. 18, (2009)...
Adm. Keating said his command is "very carefully" watching China's buildup of both nuclear-missile and attack submarines as well as diesel
submarines, which number about 65 and are increasing their patrols farther from Chinese coasts.
He defended a security failure in 2006 when the aircraft carrier battle group led by the USS Kitty Hawk allowed a Chinese submarine to sail undetected
within torpedo range of the ship.
"No danger presented to either," he said. "The carrier was in a very relaxed posture. If there were some heightened state of tension, we would,
believe me, we would not let them get that close. But we are watching the submarine technology very carefully. We want them to understand that there
are rules of the road, both figurative and literal, and it is very much in their best interest to observe and operate by those rules of the road."
China's military has rebuffed repeated efforts by Pacific Command and the Pentagon to reach a maritime agreement on naval operating rules.
The Chinese Embassy declined comment.
The truth is that were the Carrier group on an alert footing, there would have been multiple sonobuoy pickets deployed from both carrier borne
aircraft like the S-3B Viking, SH-60B Seahawk rotorcraft and long range land based P-3 Orion ASW patrols as well as active sonar search ( due to
environmental concerns, active sonar transmission,arguably the most potent weapon in the USN ASW arsenal is not employed in peacetime outside of
specialized weapon ranges and simulations.)
The story also fails to mention the multiple Seawolf/Virginia and Los Angeles class attack submarines attatched to the carrier group that would have
been quietly refining their firing solutions the entire time the PLAN sub was show boating in addition to the bulk of the Carrier task force ASW
(sorry about the scroll bars but the photo was not nearly as cool after it was re-sized )