Talk about sitting ducks (all 5 of US Navy ALT Aircraft Carriers in port)....

page: 5
18
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 04:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


I for one really appreciate your knowledge on this issue/thread.
Make no mistake that I know next to nothing about Submarines and that is the truth.
In my opinion only.....it is not the capabilities of the subs and defense of said subs that bothers me.

What does bother me is the reporting of interceptions and spotting of likely targets being subs.

How can we trust this as accurate when a ( I hate to repeat bad news) fricking rubber sub of sub standard technology can pop up in the middle of a very active and on full alert battle group surrounding a Carrier.


Now these subs cannot possible cost more than the cost of food for one day in a battle group.

Now just imagine, and it is possible that there were actually 40 of those Chinese subs laying low and they all attacked at the same time.....
After all if one went totally undetected then who knows how many were actually there in the area in the first place.

Next time a Carrier group sails to the mid East just consider how many subs might be laying on the floor just waiting.


You can't tell me they are not, I can tell you that is a good thing for the world in general.

There is only one aggressor world wide right now and I for one am glad they have to worry about their back side.

Regards, Iwinder




posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 04:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Iwinder
 


That can happen any time, even with a nuke boat. All they have to do is find an area that has a lot of magnetic signatures around, and lay in wait like the Chinese boat did. It's hardly a "rubber submarine". Diesel boats are actually as advanced as nuke boats, and much quieter at the same time. You used to have to snorkel every couple of days if you stretched it, now they can go much longer with an AIP engine.



posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Iwinder
 


That can happen any time, even with a nuke boat. All they have to do is find an area that has a lot of magnetic signatures around, and lay in wait like the Chinese boat did. It's hardly a "rubber submarine". Diesel boats are actually as advanced as nuke boats, and much quieter at the same time. You used to have to snorkel every couple of days if you stretched it, now they can go much longer with an AIP engine.


Fair enough so......what if there were 40 of them lying down there?
Also I notice that after China made their statement and very well I might add that the news backed off a bit on reporting how awesome the Carrier groups are.

I seriously want to know what your opinion is on the matter of there being a lot more than one sub in the area.

On a side note my father served in the Canadian Navy during the 2nd world war.

Mainly on a river class destroyer but also corvettes, and I really remember his tales of battle which say a lot of going back and forth from here to Europe and where ever else as well.

Mainly Convoy routes.

Regards, Iwinder
edit on 6-3-2013 by Iwinder because: (no reason given)
edit on 6-3-2013 by Iwinder because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 05:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Iwinder
 


Carriers are awesome, and they're useful, the problem is that to get rid of one, you only need a mission kill, you don't need to sink her. The Navy got really overconfident when it came to ASW, because no one else had subs near their level of quietness. Then one day an Akula surprised an LA, and the game changed. Suddenly they were playing catch up with regards to diesel boats.

They've gotten better, but are still vulnerable to them. Especially in areas like the Gulf, where the water is shallow. Sonar sucks in shallow water. I can see someone putting all their diesel boats into an area to kill a carrier. That would be a huge coup for them.



posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 05:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Great information and I thank you for that.

So I gather then that there might have been many many more subs laying in wait then just the one that sufaced.

I myself think simple is better, many cheap Uboats easily reproduced versus Atomic powered money pits that need layups for years at a time just to refuel and refit.

My father hated the corvettes as he told me the North Atlantic was rolling all the time and the boats were rolling all the time.

He was a radio operator on the corvettes in training, then offered a position on a river class destroyer as an anti air craft gunner (pom pom) which he was originally trained for in Nova Scotia.

He grabbed that spot as fast as he could say hell yes sir.



The destroyer did not roll like his little corvette did.

To the day he died he would not eat Mutton or even speak of it.

I have a nice collection of Pom Pom shells in the basement as I type this.
Regards, Iwinder



posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 06:35 PM
link   
Wow, feasable to attack or not, it sure presents a juicy target looking at the photo at link in OP.

I agree with wrabbit that 50% of the offensive naval power we have is just sitting in one place which history has shown to be impudent.

Our navy thought it impossible to have air dropped torpedos used at pearl harbor in 1941 - what do they believe impossible now.

If Norfolk is the only refit capable port then we've let our infrastructure decline much to far - surely during the cold war we had alternate facilities available such as the west coast.

What Admiral would want half his naval power in port at the same time in peace or war, much less risk political leadership who would do nothing but finger point and dither were something to happen.

The 1930's were a time of austerity also and look what happened at the end of that decade - are we to repeat history? IMHO this is like saying "go ahead, hit me" to any willing to step up to the plate.

This just seems stupid at best and very risky at its worst.

The "getting stuck on stupid" as General Honore' would put it is the fact that with so few deployable CBG's our adversaries will be emboldened to be more agressive in achieving their aims and there is not much we could do about it for several months - presenting a window of oppurtunity like that is stupid.

The risk is something like supposed EMP attack with a freighter launched medium range missile armed with a nuclear warhead on a low apogee profile from 400-600 miles off eastern coast with the ship and its crew scuttled into the deep by whomever ran the show, be hard and time consuming to lay blame justifying any counter-attack on a nation state. We would become a pariah for any hasty actions that did not have 200% proof behind them presented to the U.N.

Why would anyone in any kind of leadership role take any chances at all even if the risk was determined to be low - just does not seem worth it all IMHO.

They did this 71 years ago because nobody at the time thought just as now "who'd dare attack us"



posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 06:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Phoenix
 


Powerful post and I agree with your last line or there abouts.

Who would dare attack us?
Well when you are the world tyrant you better have a rear view mirror in my opinion.

Things are much more turbulent then during WW2 right now but I can't see the arrogance of parking 5 Carriers in one place as just the normal thing to do.

This is contrived and I believe it will tie into the financial and physical collapse of the US.

Regards, Iwinder



posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Iwinder
reply to post by Phoenix
 


Powerful post and I agree with your last line or there abouts.

Who would dare attack us?
Well when you are the world tyrant you better have a rear view mirror in my opinion.

Things are much more turbulent then during WW2 right now but I can't see the arrogance of parking 5 Carriers in one place as just the normal thing to do.

This is contrived and I believe it will tie into the financial and physical collapse of the US.

Regards, Iwinder


And then of course there are those that believe that since the US had broken Japans Naval codes and knew in advance of the attack, which is why the US carriers were not in port thereby allowing the US entry into the very lucrative WW2.

So now we have all these ducks sitting in a row.

Great time for a false flag op. Anyone else watch 'Last Resort.'

Now who has Nukes and might use one if asked nicely. Let's see, Israel perhaps. Blame it on Iran!

And War gets the US out of its financial woes.

P



posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 08:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Iwinder
 


Yes there is an arrogance at play here and are things contrived - who knows but It sure seems a big folly to do so.



posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 08:08 PM
link   
reply to post by pheonix358
 


You know I agree in part, maybe not the protagonists per say but it seems a set-up if I've ever seen one "go ahead make my day"



posted on Mar, 6 2013 @ 10:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Iwinder
 


The Ohio Replacement Program will introduce a new reactor that is both much quieter, and much longer lasting than current reactors. They will require refueling at the initial build and that is all. They will run 50 years on that refueling, and they won't have the mechanical linkages to the propulsion system that the current subs have.





new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join