It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Russian attack submarine sailed in Gulf of Mexico undetected for weeks, U.S. officials say

page: 2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 10:23 AM
reply to post by getreadyalready

Explanation: Uhmmm?

What about all the esky/suitcase nukes that were brought into the USA mainland by old USSR spy cells through that oh so pourous mexican border during the cold war???

Personal Disclosure: Stop worring about Russian Attack subs in the Gulf of Mexico ok! :shk:

And besides the USA just like every other nation only has 12miles of territorial waters [ and 200km of economic zone waters] and Russia/China?Iran/NK etc. can legally sit anywhere just outside that 12mile limit with its SLBM nuke subs all day and night and the USA cant do anything about that ... well not without creating a war!

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 10:29 AM
I wouldnt doubt there ARE US subs in the Russian Region as well on lurk status, seems to be how war games are played or battleship.

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 10:32 AM

Originally posted by getreadyalready
The Cuban Missile Crisis says otherwise. We don't want high-powered weapons so close they can strike without warning, just like Russia doesn't want our weapons in Poland and Germany.

We cannot use the Cuban missile crisis as a comparison anymore. During that time period the technology that existed required land based elements.

As for their concerns about Poland and Germany the best I can come back with is Poland and Germany will act and make decisions based on their own national interests - as it should be. They are both sovereign nations, as is Cuba, so while we or Russia can ask / make demands, ultimately its up to the nation in question.

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 10:37 AM
reply to post by Dreine

I am not surprised, I spent time on 633 Boomer the Cashmir Pulaski, we rountinely would operate in russian waters, we were quite aware of the Ruskies capabilities but at the time late 70's early 80's the did not have the funding to quiet their entire fleet.

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 10:39 AM
"Testing 1,2,3..."
"This is just a test if this was a real emergency...."

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 10:44 AM

Originally posted by Dreine
reply to post by getreadyalready

The AKULA is a nuclear-powered attack submarine... I would actually be concerned had it been a TYPHOON or OSCAR variant.

The Project 941 or Akula, Russian "Акула" ("Shark") class submarine (NATO reporting name: Typhoon) is a type of nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine deployed by the Soviet Navy in the 1980s.

So who is wrong, the US Navy, Wiki, or you...

Anyone know if this Wiki entry is correct?

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 10:48 AM
reply to post by roadgravel

Unless I'm mistaken, the Wikipedia is wrong and the AKULA and TYPHOON are two seperate platforms...



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 10:58 AM
reply to post by Dreine

OK, thanks for restoring my faith.

That wiki reference is a bit misleading.

ETA: my error in not digging deeper.
edit on 8/14/2012 by roadgravel because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 11:04 AM
Oh, sure.
We must have been too busy elsewhere.
...Or maybe that want the Russkies to think they slipped one in on us.

edit on 14-8-2012 by Aliensun because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 11:09 AM
reply to post by Dreine

WIki is wrong. Akula is a Nuclear Attack Sub. Like a Los Angeles Class or a Seawolf. Its a little bit nicer than a Los Angeles class nuclear attack sub. THe advanced Los Angeles class and the Akula 2 are about the same.

The typhoon is the Boomer.

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 11:11 AM
reply to post by BASSPLYR

Aye... the Akula is a carrier/boomer killer. The Typhoon is the one that makes cities glow for a few decades.

Wikipedia is a great tool, but there needs to be tighter restrictions on letting people post. That posting was quite confusing, but at least I had the proper platform training in "A" school to know better!

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 11:18 AM
This incident amazes me that no one here on ATS didn't make a connection with this incident and the MISSLE LAUNCH off the Kalifornia coast recently. Vlad is just flexing his muscles concerning our new and improved missle defence sytem (Yawn). Good luck with that!

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 11:19 AM
Seems they both have reference to akula. Wiki has both listed. I made sound it misleading. Oops

From FAS links posted

1. Soviet Designation 941 Akula
US-Designation Typhoon


2. Project 971 Shuka-B
Akula class
Attack Submarine (Nuclear Powered)

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 11:31 AM
Sounds a bit like round 2 of the cold war is being ramped up, whether real or not. Seems obvious this would be used to also protect budget dollars for the military.

I would think the only real reason for any belief by either side of potential warfare has to be because of the Mid East troubles and oil. What else is there to squabble over.

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 11:32 AM
het can anyone tell me about the missile launch off the california coast that the previous poster was mentioning? Never heard bout it. Was it from a SSBN?

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 12:14 PM
Having been TAD on a few subs during my career. I would bet money that one of our attack subs was shadowing the Akula during it's voyage.

Blind Man's Bluff is an excellent book about Cold War era submarine missions and espionage.

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 12:34 PM
reply to post by BASSPLYR

Mystery Missile Launch Seen off Calif. Coast

If I remeber right I think there was a similar incident in the Gulf of Mexico as well.
Here is the video for the Texas mystery -

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 01:29 PM

SO the russians are dumb enough to launch a ICBM right off the california coast where it's sure to give our guys every opportunity to study every aspect of the missile and it's launch from both US subs and facilities on the mainland and coast? Good job russia. Help us help ourselves. Thanks!!!!

I think a US SSN or Submersible Drone was probably following the Akula in the gulf the entire way. We have less SSNs these days roaming/patrolling and the ones we do are in other hot spots like the china sea, persian gulf. SO we are probably using the drones to snoop on these subs. Imagine how hard it is to detect a modern US SSN. now imagine that they are only 35 feet long now and just as capable.
edit on 14-8-2012 by BASSPLYR because: to say thanks to poster helping me out with link to missile launch!!!

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 02:09 PM

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by hp1229
Also, why would they admit to it now? Why would we admit to it now? This seems like a cry for more funding. If they did penetrate our detection, they wouldn't tell us about it and get us to fix the flaws. I think it is more likely that we DID detect them, but we played coy, and now we are using it for public perception to increase funding.
edit on 14-8-2012 by getreadyalready because: (no reason given)

I think its just that based on the below comments on the link. Of all the technology prowess and boasting of the naval superiority and commercials about being a global force, this doesn't make any sense in the true notion.

The Obama administration’s defense budget proposal in February cut $1.3 billion from Navy shipbuilding projects, which will result in scrapping plans to build 16 new warships through 2017.
The budget also called for cutting plans to buy 10 advanced P-8 anti-submarine warfare jets needed for submarine detection.

posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 02:28 PM

Originally posted by Dreine
No longer in the Navy, have been out for a little over a year, but here goes.
SOSUS is still operational, or was the last I knew. I was not a sonar tech (I was a crippie), but I do remember them speaking about it in CIC from time to time.
An AKULA class is no joke... that technology with it's caterpillar drives is absolutely astounding. The sub guys always used to tell us surface Sailors that 'If you put our boys (US, best trained submariners on the planet) on an AKULA(quietest non-diesel submarine), you could active ping all day long and you'd never find us."

Well...are you sure they have the Caterpillar Drives? It has yet to be proven worthwhile for military use due to its energy requirements. So if not the Radar, the process leaves room for electronic detection of energy or impulses used in the thruster. I couldn't find much on this subject so if someone could post relative links on this propulsion system and its practical applications in the military, it would be appreciated.

Ship propulsionAn electric current is passed through seawater in the presence of an intense magnetic field, which interacts with the magnetic field of the current through the water. Functionally, the seawater is then the moving, conductive part of an electric motor. Pushing the water out the back accelerates the vehicle in the forward direction.

The physics equation describing this propelling force is Fmag = I (L × B) where L is the vector in the direction of the current 'I' and its length is the distance the current travels, B is the magnetic field, and × denotes the cross product.

MHD is attractive because it has no moving parts, which means that a good design might be silent, reliable, and efficient.

The major problem with MHD is that with current technologies it is more expensive and much slower than a propeller driven by an engine[citation needed]. The extra expense is from the large generator that must be driven by an engine. Such a large generator is not required when an engine directly drives a propeller. However, a battery system would allow a hybrid marine ship with potential for high efficiency and lower emissions. Additionally, the MHD design eliminates many of the wear and friction pieces of the drivetrain with a directly driven propeller by an engine.


new topics

top topics

<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in