| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
If this weren't so sad...
....it would be hilarious...
Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United States Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called “Amphibious Assault Ships,” has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for granted in our collective psyche. And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat. What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however. As the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007, asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute has been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be “little more than slow-moving targets.” http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66 What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its arrogance. -- Proud to be a Liberal. |
If this weren't so sad...
On Sun, 08 Mar 2015 15:23:28 -0400, Keyser Sze
wrote: What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its arrogance. === How could we defend Israel againts their territorial hegemony without a strong military? You can't have it both ways. |
If this weren't so sad...
On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
...it would be hilarious... Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United States Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called “Amphibious Assault Ships,” has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for granted in our collective psyche. And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat. What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however. As the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007, asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute has been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be “little more than slow-moving targets.” http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66 What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its arrogance. Only thing wrong with your account: The American Task Force and the French sub were practicing war games as they would in an actual sea battle. The American Task Force at one point assumed the role as the "enemy" and the French sub's mission was to attack and sink the carrier and other ships, which they successfully simulated. What's missing is that the American Task Force still provided command/control intel for the French sub as a participating ally, even though they simultaneously played the "enemy". A more accurate test would be to have no communications allowed, no sharing of command/control intel and to allow the American Task Force to take offensive/defensive actions against the sub. |
If this weren't so sad...
On 3/8/15 4:13 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: ...it would be hilarious... Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United States Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called “Amphibious Assault Ships,” has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for granted in our collective psyche. And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat. What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however. As the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007, asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute has been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be “little more than slow-moving targets.” http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66 What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its arrogance. Only thing wrong with your account: The American Task Force and the French sub were practicing war games as they would in an actual sea battle. The American Task Force at one point assumed the role as the "enemy" and the French sub's mission was to attack and sink the carrier and other ships, which they successfully simulated. What's missing is that the American Task Force still provided command/control intel for the French sub as a participating ally, even though they simultaneously played the "enemy". A more accurate test would be to have no communications allowed, no sharing of command/control intel and to allow the American Task Force to take offensive/defensive actions against the sub. I don't think it is necessary to go through all that trouble to sink or disable one of our oversized carriers. A "smart" missile with a nuclear explosive would do it. -- Proud to be a Liberal. |
If this weren't so sad...
On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
...it would be hilarious... Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United States Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called “Amphibious Assault Ships,” has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for granted in our collective psyche. And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat. What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however. As the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007, asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute has been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be “little more than slow-moving targets.” http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66 What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its arrogance. Who gave Canada a submarine? -- Respectfully submitted by Justan Laugh of the day from Krause "I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here. I've been "born again" as a nice guy." |
If this weren't so sad...
On 3/8/2015 4:28 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 3/8/15 4:13 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: ...it would be hilarious... Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United States Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called “Amphibious Assault Ships,” has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for granted in our collective psyche. And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat. What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however. As the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007, asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute has been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be “little more than slow-moving targets.” http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66 What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its arrogance. Only thing wrong with your account: The American Task Force and the French sub were practicing war games as they would in an actual sea battle. The American Task Force at one point assumed the role as the "enemy" and the French sub's mission was to attack and sink the carrier and other ships, which they successfully simulated. What's missing is that the American Task Force still provided command/control intel for the French sub as a participating ally, even though they simultaneously played the "enemy". A more accurate test would be to have no communications allowed, no sharing of command/control intel and to allow the American Task Force to take offensive/defensive actions against the sub. I don't think it is necessary to go through all that trouble to sink or disable one of our oversized carriers. A "smart" missile with a nuclear explosive would do it. Each task force has very formidable defense systems against aircraft, missles and submarines. The Achilles Heel may be the long range, anti-ship missiles reported to have been recently developed by the Chinese however it has not been demonstrated as of yet. In a real, extended war it's very likely we'd lose some carriers but heavy sea battle warfare isn't likely to be like that ... meaning an extended battle. Plus, we have what, eleven carriers? China and most of the rest of the world has one each. |
If this weren't so sad...
On 3/8/15 4:43 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/8/2015 4:28 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 3/8/15 4:13 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: ...it would be hilarious... Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United States Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called “Amphibious Assault Ships,” has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for granted in our collective psyche. And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat. What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however. As the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007, asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute has been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be “little more than slow-moving targets.” http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66 What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its arrogance. Only thing wrong with your account: The American Task Force and the French sub were practicing war games as they would in an actual sea battle. The American Task Force at one point assumed the role as the "enemy" and the French sub's mission was to attack and sink the carrier and other ships, which they successfully simulated. What's missing is that the American Task Force still provided command/control intel for the French sub as a participating ally, even though they simultaneously played the "enemy". A more accurate test would be to have no communications allowed, no sharing of command/control intel and to allow the American Task Force to take offensive/defensive actions against the sub. I don't think it is necessary to go through all that trouble to sink or disable one of our oversized carriers. A "smart" missile with a nuclear explosive would do it. Each task force has very formidable defense systems against aircraft, missles and submarines. The Achilles Heel may be the long range, anti-ship missiles reported to have been recently developed by the Chinese however it has not been demonstrated as of yet. In a real, extended war it's very likely we'd lose some carriers but heavy sea battle warfare isn't likely to be like that ... meaning an extended battle. Plus, we have what, eleven carriers? China and most of the rest of the world has one each. We're not going to get into a heavy sea battle with anyone. -- Proud to be a Liberal. |
If this weren't so sad...
On 3/8/2015 4:45 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 3/8/15 4:43 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 3/8/2015 4:28 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 3/8/15 4:13 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: ...it would be hilarious... Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United States Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called “Amphibious Assault Ships,” has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for granted in our collective psyche. And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat. What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however. As the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007, asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute has been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be “little more than slow-moving targets.” http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66 What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its arrogance. Only thing wrong with your account: The American Task Force and the French sub were practicing war games as they would in an actual sea battle. The American Task Force at one point assumed the role as the "enemy" and the French sub's mission was to attack and sink the carrier and other ships, which they successfully simulated. What's missing is that the American Task Force still provided command/control intel for the French sub as a participating ally, even though they simultaneously played the "enemy". A more accurate test would be to have no communications allowed, no sharing of command/control intel and to allow the American Task Force to take offensive/defensive actions against the sub. I don't think it is necessary to go through all that trouble to sink or disable one of our oversized carriers. A "smart" missile with a nuclear explosive would do it. Each task force has very formidable defense systems against aircraft, missles and submarines. The Achilles Heel may be the long range, anti-ship missiles reported to have been recently developed by the Chinese however it has not been demonstrated as of yet. In a real, extended war it's very likely we'd lose some carriers but heavy sea battle warfare isn't likely to be like that ... meaning an extended battle. Plus, we have what, eleven carriers? China and most of the rest of the world has one each. We're not going to get into a heavy sea battle with anyone. No. But carriers provide mobile platforms for putting a lot of resources just about anywhere in the world without necessarily relying on friendly ports or bases. |
If this weren't so sad...
On 3/8/15 4:53 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/8/2015 4:45 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 3/8/15 4:43 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 3/8/2015 4:28 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 3/8/15 4:13 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: ...it would be hilarious... Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United States Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called “Amphibious Assault Ships,” has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for granted in our collective psyche. And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat. What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however. As the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007, asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute has been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be “little more than slow-moving targets.” http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66 What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its arrogance. Only thing wrong with your account: The American Task Force and the French sub were practicing war games as they would in an actual sea battle. The American Task Force at one point assumed the role as the "enemy" and the French sub's mission was to attack and sink the carrier and other ships, which they successfully simulated. What's missing is that the American Task Force still provided command/control intel for the French sub as a participating ally, even though they simultaneously played the "enemy". A more accurate test would be to have no communications allowed, no sharing of command/control intel and to allow the American Task Force to take offensive/defensive actions against the sub. I don't think it is necessary to go through all that trouble to sink or disable one of our oversized carriers. A "smart" missile with a nuclear explosive would do it. Each task force has very formidable defense systems against aircraft, missles and submarines. The Achilles Heel may be the long range, anti-ship missiles reported to have been recently developed by the Chinese however it has not been demonstrated as of yet. In a real, extended war it's very likely we'd lose some carriers but heavy sea battle warfare isn't likely to be like that ... meaning an extended battle. Plus, we have what, eleven carriers? China and most of the rest of the world has one each. We're not going to get into a heavy sea battle with anyone. No. But carriers provide mobile platforms for putting a lot of resources just about anywhere in the world without necessarily relying on friendly ports or bases. Ahh, that's why things turned out so well for us in Panama and Grenada, eh? :) -- Proud to be a Liberal. |
If this weren't so sad...
On 3/8/2015 5:03 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 3/8/15 4:53 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 3/8/2015 4:45 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 3/8/15 4:43 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 3/8/2015 4:28 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 3/8/15 4:13 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: ...it would be hilarious... Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United States Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called “Amphibious Assault Ships,” has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for granted in our collective psyche. And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat. What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however. As the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007, asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute has been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be “little more than slow-moving targets.” http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66 What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its arrogance. Only thing wrong with your account: The American Task Force and the French sub were practicing war games as they would in an actual sea battle. The American Task Force at one point assumed the role as the "enemy" and the French sub's mission was to attack and sink the carrier and other ships, which they successfully simulated. What's missing is that the American Task Force still provided command/control intel for the French sub as a participating ally, even though they simultaneously played the "enemy". A more accurate test would be to have no communications allowed, no sharing of command/control intel and to allow the American Task Force to take offensive/defensive actions against the sub. I don't think it is necessary to go through all that trouble to sink or disable one of our oversized carriers. A "smart" missile with a nuclear explosive would do it. Each task force has very formidable defense systems against aircraft, missles and submarines. The Achilles Heel may be the long range, anti-ship missiles reported to have been recently developed by the Chinese however it has not been demonstrated as of yet. In a real, extended war it's very likely we'd lose some carriers but heavy sea battle warfare isn't likely to be like that ... meaning an extended battle. Plus, we have what, eleven carriers? China and most of the rest of the world has one each. We're not going to get into a heavy sea battle with anyone. No. But carriers provide mobile platforms for putting a lot of resources just about anywhere in the world without necessarily relying on friendly ports or bases. Ahh, that's why things turned out so well for us in Panama and Grenada, eh? :) Have you ever stopped to consider why no major adversary has been stupid enough to start a fighting war with the USA for the past 70 plus years? |
If this weren't so sad...
On 3/8/2015 4:45 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 3/8/15 4:43 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 3/8/2015 4:28 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 3/8/15 4:13 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: ...it would be hilarious... Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United States Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called “Amphibious Assault Ships,” has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for granted in our collective psyche. And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat. What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however. As the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007, asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute has been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be “little more than slow-moving targets.” http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66 What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its arrogance. Only thing wrong with your account: The American Task Force and the French sub were practicing war games as they would in an actual sea battle. The American Task Force at one point assumed the role as the "enemy" and the French sub's mission was to attack and sink the carrier and other ships, which they successfully simulated. What's missing is that the American Task Force still provided command/control intel for the French sub as a participating ally, even though they simultaneously played the "enemy". A more accurate test would be to have no communications allowed, no sharing of command/control intel and to allow the American Task Force to take offensive/defensive actions against the sub. I don't think it is necessary to go through all that trouble to sink or disable one of our oversized carriers. A "smart" missile with a nuclear explosive would do it. Each task force has very formidable defense systems against aircraft, missles and submarines. The Achilles Heel may be the long range, anti-ship missiles reported to have been recently developed by the Chinese however it has not been demonstrated as of yet. In a real, extended war it's very likely we'd lose some carriers but heavy sea battle warfare isn't likely to be like that ... meaning an extended battle. Plus, we have what, eleven carriers? China and most of the rest of the world has one each. We're not going to get into a heavy sea battle with anyone. Why not? -- Respectfully submitted by Justan Laugh of the day from Krause "I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here. I've been "born again" as a nice guy." |
If this weren't so sad...
On Sun, 08 Mar 2015 16:13:56 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Sze wrote: ...it would be hilarious... Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United States Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called Amphibious Assault Ships, has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for granted in our collective psyche. And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat. What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however. As the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007, asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute has been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be little more than slow-moving targets. http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66 What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its arrogance. Only thing wrong with your account: The American Task Force and the French sub were practicing war games as they would in an actual sea battle. The American Task Force at one point assumed the role as the "enemy" and the French sub's mission was to attack and sink the carrier and other ships, which they successfully simulated. What's missing is that the American Task Force still provided command/control intel for the French sub as a participating ally, even though they simultaneously played the "enemy". A more accurate test would be to have no communications allowed, no sharing of command/control intel and to allow the American Task Force to take offensive/defensive actions against the sub. And to allow the use of real weapons. -- Guns don't cause problems. Gun owner *behavior* causes problems. |
If this weren't so sad...
On Sun, 08 Mar 2015 16:28:57 -0400, Keyser Sze wrote:
On 3/8/15 4:13 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Sze wrote: ...it would be hilarious... Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United States Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called Amphibious Assault Ships, has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for granted in our collective psyche. And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat. What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however. As the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007, asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute has been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be little more than slow-moving targets. http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66 What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its arrogance. Only thing wrong with your account: The American Task Force and the French sub were practicing war games as they would in an actual sea battle. The American Task Force at one point assumed the role as the "enemy" and the French sub's mission was to attack and sink the carrier and other ships, which they successfully simulated. What's missing is that the American Task Force still provided command/control intel for the French sub as a participating ally, even though they simultaneously played the "enemy". A more accurate test would be to have no communications allowed, no sharing of command/control intel and to allow the American Task Force to take offensive/defensive actions against the sub. I don't think it is necessary to go through all that trouble to sink or disable one of our oversized carriers. A "smart" missile with a nuclear explosive would do it. Depending on how close the missile could get before being taken out, you may be right. The ships around the carrier have a tremendous anti-missile capability. -- Guns don't cause problems. Gun owner *behavior* causes problems. |
If this weren't so sad...
On 3/8/15 5:38 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/8/2015 5:03 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 3/8/15 4:53 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 3/8/2015 4:45 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 3/8/15 4:43 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 3/8/2015 4:28 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 3/8/15 4:13 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: ...it would be hilarious... Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United States Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called “Amphibious Assault Ships,” has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for granted in our collective psyche. And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat. What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however. As the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007, asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute has been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be “little more than slow-moving targets.” http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66 What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its arrogance. Only thing wrong with your account: The American Task Force and the French sub were practicing war games as they would in an actual sea battle. The American Task Force at one point assumed the role as the "enemy" and the French sub's mission was to attack and sink the carrier and other ships, which they successfully simulated. What's missing is that the American Task Force still provided command/control intel for the French sub as a participating ally, even though they simultaneously played the "enemy". A more accurate test would be to have no communications allowed, no sharing of command/control intel and to allow the American Task Force to take offensive/defensive actions against the sub. I don't think it is necessary to go through all that trouble to sink or disable one of our oversized carriers. A "smart" missile with a nuclear explosive would do it. Each task force has very formidable defense systems against aircraft, missles and submarines. The Achilles Heel may be the long range, anti-ship missiles reported to have been recently developed by the Chinese however it has not been demonstrated as of yet. In a real, extended war it's very likely we'd lose some carriers but heavy sea battle warfare isn't likely to be like that ... meaning an extended battle. Plus, we have what, eleven carriers? China and most of the rest of the world has one each. We're not going to get into a heavy sea battle with anyone. No. But carriers provide mobile platforms for putting a lot of resources just about anywhere in the world without necessarily relying on friendly ports or bases. Ahh, that's why things turned out so well for us in Panama and Grenada, eh? :) Have you ever stopped to consider why no major adversary has been stupid enough to start a fighting war with the USA for the past 70 plus years? Why should "they" have to start a war with us when "we" are so willing and eager to start a war with "them"? -- Proud to be a Liberal. |
If this weren't so sad...
On Sunday, 8 March 2015 17:31:52 UTC-3, Justan Olphart wrote:
On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Sze wrote: ...it would be hilarious... Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United States Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called "Amphibious Assault Ships," has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for granted in our collective psyche. And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat. What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however. As the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007, asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute has been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be "little more than slow-moving targets." http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66 What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its arrogance. Who gave Canada a submarine? -- Respectfully submitted by Justan Laugh of the day from Krause "I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here. I've been "born again" as a nice guy." We used to read stories of our previous class of diesel electric submarines getting within torpedo range of 'merican carriers. Didn't realize the newer Upholder class did the same thing. BTW ..it was four submarines we took off British hands. Three are based in Halifax in various stages of operational readiness. |
If this weren't so sad...
True North wrote:
On Sunday, 8 March 2015 17:31:52 UTC-3, Justan Olphart wrote: On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: ...it would be hilarious... Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United States Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called "Amphibious Assault Ships," has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for granted in our collective psyche. And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat. What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however. As the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007, asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute has been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be "little more than slow-moving targets." http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66 What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its arrogance. Who gave Canada a submarine? -- Respectfully submitted by Justan Laugh of the day from Krause "I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here. I've been "born again" as a nice guy." We used to read stories of our previous class of diesel electric submarines getting within torpedo range of 'merican carriers. Didn't realize the newer Upholder class did the same thing. BTW ..it was four submarines we took off British hands. Three are based in Halifax in various stages of operational readiness. We will be buying huge aircraft carriers until some two bit terrorist group takes one out with a missile. -- Sent from my iPhone 6+ |
If this weren't so sad...
On Sun, 08 Mar 2015 19:49:58 -0400, Keyser Sze wrote:
On 3/8/15 5:38 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 3/8/2015 5:03 PM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 3/8/15 4:53 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 3/8/2015 4:45 PM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 3/8/15 4:43 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 3/8/2015 4:28 PM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 3/8/15 4:13 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Sze wrote: ...it would be hilarious... Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United States Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called Amphibious Assault Ships, has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for granted in our collective psyche. And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat. What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however. As the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007, asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute has been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be little more than slow-moving targets. http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66 What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its arrogance. Only thing wrong with your account: The American Task Force and the French sub were practicing war games as they would in an actual sea battle. The American Task Force at one point assumed the role as the "enemy" and the French sub's mission was to attack and sink the carrier and other ships, which they successfully simulated. What's missing is that the American Task Force still provided command/control intel for the French sub as a participating ally, even though they simultaneously played the "enemy". A more accurate test would be to have no communications allowed, no sharing of command/control intel and to allow the American Task Force to take offensive/defensive actions against the sub. I don't think it is necessary to go through all that trouble to sink or disable one of our oversized carriers. A "smart" missile with a nuclear explosive would do it. Each task force has very formidable defense systems against aircraft, missles and submarines. The Achilles Heel may be the long range, anti-ship missiles reported to have been recently developed by the Chinese however it has not been demonstrated as of yet. In a real, extended war it's very likely we'd lose some carriers but heavy sea battle warfare isn't likely to be like that ... meaning an extended battle. Plus, we have what, eleven carriers? China and most of the rest of the world has one each. We're not going to get into a heavy sea battle with anyone. No. But carriers provide mobile platforms for putting a lot of resources just about anywhere in the world without necessarily relying on friendly ports or bases. Ahh, that's why things turned out so well for us in Panama and Grenada, eh? :) Have you ever stopped to consider why no major adversary has been stupid enough to start a fighting war with the USA for the past 70 plus years? Why should "they" have to start a war with us when "we" are so willing and eager to start a war with "them"? Granted, Luddite has no inherent right to expect an answer to a question, but perhaps you just didn't understand it. -- Guns don't cause problems. Gun owner *behavior* causes problems. |
If this weren't so sad...
On 9 Mar 2015 00:39:06 GMT, Keyser Sze wrote:
True North wrote: On Sunday, 8 March 2015 17:31:52 UTC-3, Justan Olphart wrote: On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Sze wrote: ...it would be hilarious... Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United States Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called "Amphibious Assault Ships," has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for granted in our collective psyche. And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat. What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however. As the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007, asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute has been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be "little more than slow-moving targets." http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66 What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its arrogance. Who gave Canada a submarine? -- Respectfully submitted by Justan Laugh of the day from Krause "I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here. I've been "born again" as a nice guy." We used to read stories of our previous class of diesel electric submarines getting within torpedo range of 'merican carriers. Didn't realize the newer Upholder class did the same thing. BTW ..it was four submarines we took off British hands. Three are based in Halifax in various stages of operational readiness. We will be buying huge aircraft carriers until some two bit terrorist group takes one out with a missile. Have you written your politicians with your whines? Perhaps you could inform Don how to spell the name of your country. -- Guns don't cause problems. Gun owner *behavior* causes problems. |
If this weren't so sad...
On 3/8/15 8:56 PM, John H. wrote:
On 9 Mar 2015 00:39:06 GMT, Keyser Sze wrote: True North wrote: On Sunday, 8 March 2015 17:31:52 UTC-3, Justan Olphart wrote: On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Sze wrote: ...it would be hilarious... Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United States Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called "Amphibious Assault Ships," has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for granted in our collective psyche. And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat. What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however. As the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007, asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute has been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be "little more than slow-moving targets." http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66 What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its arrogance. Who gave Canada a submarine? -- Respectfully submitted by Justan Laugh of the day from Krause "I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here. I've been "born again" as a nice guy." We used to read stories of our previous class of diesel electric submarines getting within torpedo range of 'merican carriers. Didn't realize the newer Upholder class did the same thing. BTW ..it was four submarines we took off British hands. Three are based in Halifax in various stages of operational readiness. We will be buying huge aircraft carriers until some two bit terrorist group takes one out with a missile. Have you written your politicians with your whines? Perhaps you could inform Don how to spell the name of your country. You are the self-appointed usenet sheriff, Col Klink. You do it. You prefer 'Murican? to 'merican? -- Proud to be a Liberal. |
If this weren't so sad...
On 3/8/2015 8:39 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
True North wrote: On Sunday, 8 March 2015 17:31:52 UTC-3, Justan Olphart wrote: On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: ...it would be hilarious... Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United States Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called "Amphibious Assault Ships," has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for granted in our collective psyche. And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat. What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however. As the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007, asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute has been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be "little more than slow-moving targets." http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66 What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its arrogance. Who gave Canada a submarine? -- Respectfully submitted by Justan Laugh of the day from Krause "I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here. I've been "born again" as a nice guy." We used to read stories of our previous class of diesel electric submarines getting within torpedo range of 'merican carriers. Didn't realize the newer Upholder class did the same thing. BTW ..it was four submarines we took off British hands. Three are based in Halifax in various stages of operational readiness. We will be buying huge aircraft carriers until some two bit terrorist group takes one out with a missile. It would take one hell of "a" missile to take out a modern aircraft carrier. |
If this weren't so sad...
"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 3/8/2015 8:39 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: True North wrote: On Sunday, 8 March 2015 17:31:52 UTC-3, Justan Olphart wrote: On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: ...it would be hilarious... Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United States Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called "Amphibious Assault Ships," has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for granted in our collective psyche. And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat. What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however. As the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007, asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute has been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be "little more than slow-moving targets." http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66 What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its arrogance. Who gave Canada a submarine? -- Respectfully submitted by Justan Laugh of the day from Krause "I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here. I've been "born again" as a nice guy." We used to read stories of our previous class of diesel electric submarines getting within torpedo range of 'merican carriers. Didn't realize the newer Upholder class did the same thing. BTW ..it was four submarines we took off British hands. Three are based in Halifax in various stages of operational readiness. We will be buying huge aircraft carriers until some two bit terrorist group takes one out with a missile. It would take one hell of "a" missile to take out a modern aircraft carrier. The navy used to say something similar about its battleships. -- Sent from my iPhone 6+ |
If this weren't so sad...
On Sun, 8 Mar 2015 17:08:19 -0700 (PDT), True North
wrote: We used to read stories of our previous class of diesel electric submarines getting within torpedo range of 'merican carriers. Didn't realize the newer Upholder class did the same thing. BTW ..it was four submarines we took off British hands. Three are based in Halifax in various stages of operational readiness. === Those guys are so good at submarine tracking and identification that they probably knew they were coming 100 miles away. The propellor and hull noise of every ship and sub is totally unique, just like a finger print or DNA sample. There are world wide networks of underwater microphones that track ships and subs everywhere. The noise signature of every one is in a database. |
If this weren't so sad...
On Sunday, March 8, 2015 at 6:45:04 PM UTC-7, Keyser Sze wrote:
On 3/8/15 8:56 PM, John H. wrote: On 9 Mar 2015 00:39:06 GMT, Keyser Sze wrote: True North wrote: On Sunday, 8 March 2015 17:31:52 UTC-3, Justan Olphart wrote: On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Sze wrote: ...it would be hilarious... Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United States Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called "Amphibious Assault Ships," has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for granted in our collective psyche. And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat. What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however.. As the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007, asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute has been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be "little more than slow-moving targets." http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66 What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its arrogance. Who gave Canada a submarine? -- Respectfully submitted by Justan Laugh of the day from Krause "I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here. I've been "born again" as a nice guy." We used to read stories of our previous class of diesel electric submarines getting within torpedo range of 'merican carriers. Didn't realize the newer Upholder class did the same thing. BTW ..it was four submarines we took off British hands. Three are based in Halifax in various stages of operational readiness. We will be buying huge aircraft carriers until some two bit terrorist group takes one out with a missile. Have you written your politicians with your whines? Perhaps you could inform Don how to spell the name of your country. You are the self-appointed usenet sheriff, Col Klink. You do it. You prefer 'Murican? to 'merican? -- Proud to be a Liberal. Ah! Having your ass handed to you properly, eh Krause? One can tell when you're desperate to reclaim what little you have. You start insulting when you're backed into a corner. Krause the Klutz is a good handle for you. |
If this weren't so sad...
On 3/8/2015 11:58 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Sun, 8 Mar 2015 17:08:19 -0700 (PDT), True North wrote: We used to read stories of our previous class of diesel electric submarines getting within torpedo range of 'merican carriers. Didn't realize the newer Upholder class did the same thing. BTW ..it was four submarines we took off British hands. Three are based in Halifax in various stages of operational readiness. === Those guys are so good at submarine tracking and identification that they probably knew they were coming 100 miles away. The propellor and hull noise of every ship and sub is totally unique, just like a finger print or DNA sample. There are world wide networks of underwater microphones that track ships and subs everywhere. The noise signature of every one is in a database. The US military system was called SOSUS. The stationary, land based SOSUS systems have been phased out in favor of a ship and sub mounted towed array system that can be used anywhere. It's a passive system and compares noise signatures to a library of signatures contained it it's computer system. It can detect and identify a vessel by name, it's location, speed, course, etc., and like other systems the data is networked via high speed communication links to many ships. I was assigned to a project group in the Navy that had the first operational towed array system installed. At the time it was called "Interim Towed Array Surveillance System" (ITASS) and the first ship to receive the equipment was the USS Van Voorhis, followed by two other DE's of the same class. This was back in 1970. The system has evolved and has been improved and is now standard equipment on most Navy combat vessels and subs. It's one of several methods for detecting and locating surface ships and submarines. There are others currently deployed and being developed. Blue/Green laser technology continues to be explored for sub detection and communication purposes. |
If this weren't so sad...
|
If this weren't so sad...
On 3/8/2015 9:45 PM, Keyser Sze wrote:
On 3/8/15 8:56 PM, John H. wrote: On 9 Mar 2015 00:39:06 GMT, Keyser Sze wrote: True North wrote: On Sunday, 8 March 2015 17:31:52 UTC-3, Justan Olphart wrote: On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Sze wrote: ...it would be hilarious... Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United States Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called "Amphibious Assault Ships," has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for granted in our collective psyche. And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat. What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however. As the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007, asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute has been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be "little more than slow-moving targets." http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66 What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its arrogance. Who gave Canada a submarine? -- Respectfully submitted by Justan Laugh of the day from Krause "I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here. I've been "born again" as a nice guy." We used to read stories of our previous class of diesel electric submarines getting within torpedo range of 'merican carriers. Didn't realize the newer Upholder class did the same thing. BTW ..it was four submarines we took off British hands. Three are based in Halifax in various stages of operational readiness. We will be buying huge aircraft carriers until some two bit terrorist group takes one out with a missile. Have you written your politicians with your whines? Perhaps you could inform Don how to spell the name of your country. You are the self-appointed usenet sheriff, Col Klink. You do it. You prefer 'Murican? to 'merican? You must really hate America to speak of it as you do. Why don't you emigrate to a socialist or communist country which seems to suit you better. Good luck finding one who will accept a loud mouth tax evader with lots of guns and ammunition. -- Respectfully submitted by Justan Laugh of the day from Krause "I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here. I've been "born again" as a nice guy." |
If this weren't so sad...
On Sun, 8 Mar 2015 23:54:53 -0700 (PDT), Tom Nofinger wrote:
On Sunday, March 8, 2015 at 6:45:04 PM UTC-7, Keyser Sze wrote: On 3/8/15 8:56 PM, John H. wrote: On 9 Mar 2015 00:39:06 GMT, Keyser Sze wrote: True North wrote: On Sunday, 8 March 2015 17:31:52 UTC-3, Justan Olphart wrote: On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Sze wrote: ...it would be hilarious... Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United States Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called "Amphibious Assault Ships," has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for granted in our collective psyche. And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat. What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however. As the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007, asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute has been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be "little more than slow-moving targets." http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66 What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its arrogance. Who gave Canada a submarine? -- Respectfully submitted by Justan Laugh of the day from Krause "I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here. I've been "born again" as a nice guy." We used to read stories of our previous class of diesel electric submarines getting within torpedo range of 'merican carriers. Didn't realize the newer Upholder class did the same thing. BTW ..it was four submarines we took off British hands. Three are based in Halifax in various stages of operational readiness. We will be buying huge aircraft carriers until some two bit terrorist group takes one out with a missile. Have you written your politicians with your whines? Perhaps you could inform Don how to spell the name of your country. You are the self-appointed usenet sheriff, Col Klink. You do it. You prefer 'Murican? to 'merican? -- Proud to be a Liberal. Ah! Having your ass handed to you properly, eh Krause? One can tell when you're desperate to reclaim what little you have. You start insulting when you're backed into a corner. Krause the Klutz is a good handle for you. You're talking a heavy job there! -- Guns don't cause problems. Gun owner *behavior* causes problems. |
If this weren't so sad...
On Mon, 09 Mar 2015 08:17:54 -0400, Justan Olphart wrote:
On 3/8/2015 9:45 PM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 3/8/15 8:56 PM, John H. wrote: On 9 Mar 2015 00:39:06 GMT, Keyser Sze wrote: True North wrote: On Sunday, 8 March 2015 17:31:52 UTC-3, Justan Olphart wrote: On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Sze wrote: ...it would be hilarious... Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United States Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called "Amphibious Assault Ships," has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for granted in our collective psyche. And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat. What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however. As the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007, asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute has been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be "little more than slow-moving targets." http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66 What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its arrogance. Who gave Canada a submarine? -- Respectfully submitted by Justan Laugh of the day from Krause "I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here. I've been "born again" as a nice guy." We used to read stories of our previous class of diesel electric submarines getting within torpedo range of 'merican carriers. Didn't realize the newer Upholder class did the same thing. BTW ..it was four submarines we took off British hands. Three are based in Halifax in various stages of operational readiness. We will be buying huge aircraft carriers until some two bit terrorist group takes one out with a missile. Have you written your politicians with your whines? Perhaps you could inform Don how to spell the name of your country. You are the self-appointed usenet sheriff, Col Klink. You do it. You prefer 'Murican? to 'merican? You must really hate America to speak of it as you do. Why don't you emigrate to a socialist or communist country which seems to suit you better. Good luck finding one who will accept a loud mouth tax evader with lots of guns and ammunition. I wonder what kick it gives them to misspell the name of a country. -- Guns don't cause problems. Gun owner *behavior* causes problems. |
If this weren't so sad...
On Mon, 09 Mar 2015 04:17:35 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 3/8/2015 11:58 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Sun, 8 Mar 2015 17:08:19 -0700 (PDT), True North wrote: We used to read stories of our previous class of diesel electric submarines getting within torpedo range of 'merican carriers. Didn't realize the newer Upholder class did the same thing. BTW ..it was four submarines we took off British hands. Three are based in Halifax in various stages of operational readiness. === Those guys are so good at submarine tracking and identification that they probably knew they were coming 100 miles away. The propellor and hull noise of every ship and sub is totally unique, just like a finger print or DNA sample. There are world wide networks of underwater microphones that track ships and subs everywhere. The noise signature of every one is in a database. The US military system was called SOSUS. The stationary, land based SOSUS systems have been phased out in favor of a ship and sub mounted towed array system that can be used anywhere. It's a passive system and compares noise signatures to a library of signatures contained it it's computer system. It can detect and identify a vessel by name, it's location, speed, course, etc., and like other systems the data is networked via high speed communication links to many ships. I was assigned to a project group in the Navy that had the first operational towed array system installed. At the time it was called "Interim Towed Array Surveillance System" (ITASS) and the first ship to receive the equipment was the USS Van Voorhis, followed by two other DE's of the same class. This was back in 1970. The system has evolved and has been improved and is now standard equipment on most Navy combat vessels and subs. It's one of several methods for detecting and locating surface ships and submarines. There are others currently deployed and being developed. Blue/Green laser technology continues to be explored for sub detection and communication purposes. Don't forget the P-3's and their replacements. My niece is now piloting 'test bed' P-3's, and the stuff is so classified she won't even tell her dad what it's about. -- Guns don't cause problems. Gun owner *behavior* causes problems. |
If this weren't so sad...
On Mon, 09 Mar 2015 01:58:57 -0400, wrote:
On Sun, 08 Mar 2015 16:28:57 -0400, Keyser Sze wrote: On 3/8/15 4:13 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Sze wrote: ...it would be hilarious... Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United States Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called Amphibious Assault Ships, has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for granted in our collective psyche. And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat. What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however. As the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007, asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute has been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be little more than slow-moving targets. http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66 What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its arrogance. Only thing wrong with your account: The American Task Force and the French sub were practicing war games as they would in an actual sea battle. The American Task Force at one point assumed the role as the "enemy" and the French sub's mission was to attack and sink the carrier and other ships, which they successfully simulated. What's missing is that the American Task Force still provided command/control intel for the French sub as a participating ally, even though they simultaneously played the "enemy". A more accurate test would be to have no communications allowed, no sharing of command/control intel and to allow the American Task Force to take offensive/defensive actions against the sub. I don't think it is necessary to go through all that trouble to sink or disable one of our oversized carriers. A "smart" missile with a nuclear explosive would do it. Aircraft carriers are there to project force against 3d world countries. When Zumwalt was asked how long our carriers would last against the Soviets he said "a couple days". I will say, we have pretty good detection capability against subs but that is not the only danger. The Chinese have a truck mounted missile that could take out a carrier from 2 thousand miles away. The opinion about how many the Aegis screen could take down is mixed. Getting close to a carrier and hitting the carrier are not the same thing. -- Guns don't cause problems. Gun owner *behavior* causes problems. |
If this weren't so sad...
On 3/9/2015 9:35 AM, John H. wrote:
On Mon, 09 Mar 2015 04:17:35 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 3/8/2015 11:58 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Sun, 8 Mar 2015 17:08:19 -0700 (PDT), True North wrote: We used to read stories of our previous class of diesel electric submarines getting within torpedo range of 'merican carriers. Didn't realize the newer Upholder class did the same thing. BTW ..it was four submarines we took off British hands. Three are based in Halifax in various stages of operational readiness. === Those guys are so good at submarine tracking and identification that they probably knew they were coming 100 miles away. The propellor and hull noise of every ship and sub is totally unique, just like a finger print or DNA sample. There are world wide networks of underwater microphones that track ships and subs everywhere. The noise signature of every one is in a database. The US military system was called SOSUS. The stationary, land based SOSUS systems have been phased out in favor of a ship and sub mounted towed array system that can be used anywhere. It's a passive system and compares noise signatures to a library of signatures contained it it's computer system. It can detect and identify a vessel by name, it's location, speed, course, etc., and like other systems the data is networked via high speed communication links to many ships. I was assigned to a project group in the Navy that had the first operational towed array system installed. At the time it was called "Interim Towed Array Surveillance System" (ITASS) and the first ship to receive the equipment was the USS Van Voorhis, followed by two other DE's of the same class. This was back in 1970. The system has evolved and has been improved and is now standard equipment on most Navy combat vessels and subs. It's one of several methods for detecting and locating surface ships and submarines. There are others currently deployed and being developed. Blue/Green laser technology continues to be explored for sub detection and communication purposes. Don't forget the P-3's and their replacements. My niece is now piloting 'test bed' P-3's, and the stuff is so classified she won't even tell her dad what it's about. I recently read that the P-8A Poseidon (replacement for the P3 Orion) is having a few teething problems with some of it's systems. Once they get them sorted out it should be a very capable ASW platform. |
If this weren't so sad...
On 3/9/15 9:41 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/9/2015 9:35 AM, John H. wrote: On Mon, 09 Mar 2015 04:17:35 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 3/8/2015 11:58 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Sun, 8 Mar 2015 17:08:19 -0700 (PDT), True North wrote: We used to read stories of our previous class of diesel electric submarines getting within torpedo range of 'merican carriers. Didn't realize the newer Upholder class did the same thing. BTW ..it was four submarines we took off British hands. Three are based in Halifax in various stages of operational readiness. === Those guys are so good at submarine tracking and identification that they probably knew they were coming 100 miles away. The propellor and hull noise of every ship and sub is totally unique, just like a finger print or DNA sample. There are world wide networks of underwater microphones that track ships and subs everywhere. The noise signature of every one is in a database. The US military system was called SOSUS. The stationary, land based SOSUS systems have been phased out in favor of a ship and sub mounted towed array system that can be used anywhere. It's a passive system and compares noise signatures to a library of signatures contained it it's computer system. It can detect and identify a vessel by name, it's location, speed, course, etc., and like other systems the data is networked via high speed communication links to many ships. I was assigned to a project group in the Navy that had the first operational towed array system installed. At the time it was called "Interim Towed Array Surveillance System" (ITASS) and the first ship to receive the equipment was the USS Van Voorhis, followed by two other DE's of the same class. This was back in 1970. The system has evolved and has been improved and is now standard equipment on most Navy combat vessels and subs. It's one of several methods for detecting and locating surface ships and submarines. There are others currently deployed and being developed. Blue/Green laser technology continues to be explored for sub detection and communication purposes. Don't forget the P-3's and their replacements. My niece is now piloting 'test bed' P-3's, and the stuff is so classified she won't even tell her dad what it's about. I recently read that the P-8A Poseidon (replacement for the P3 Orion) is having a few teething problems with some of it's systems. Once they get them sorted out it should be a very capable ASW platform. Why bother with an expensive submarine when you can disable or sink a carrier with an array of missiles fired from the backs of trucks? -- Proud to be a Liberal. |
If this weren't so sad...
On Monday, 9 March 2015 10:31:43 UTC-3, John H. wrote:
I wonder what kick it gives them to misspell the name of a country. -- Quit being such a drama queen, Johnny. We're not making fun of the country's name...just how some of y'all talk. |
If this weren't so sad...
On 3/9/2015 9:45 AM, Keyser Sze wrote:
On 3/9/15 9:41 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 3/9/2015 9:35 AM, John H. wrote: On Mon, 09 Mar 2015 04:17:35 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 3/8/2015 11:58 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Sun, 8 Mar 2015 17:08:19 -0700 (PDT), True North wrote: We used to read stories of our previous class of diesel electric submarines getting within torpedo range of 'merican carriers. Didn't realize the newer Upholder class did the same thing. BTW ..it was four submarines we took off British hands. Three are based in Halifax in various stages of operational readiness. === Those guys are so good at submarine tracking and identification that they probably knew they were coming 100 miles away. The propellor and hull noise of every ship and sub is totally unique, just like a finger print or DNA sample. There are world wide networks of underwater microphones that track ships and subs everywhere. The noise signature of every one is in a database. The US military system was called SOSUS. The stationary, land based SOSUS systems have been phased out in favor of a ship and sub mounted towed array system that can be used anywhere. It's a passive system and compares noise signatures to a library of signatures contained it it's computer system. It can detect and identify a vessel by name, it's location, speed, course, etc., and like other systems the data is networked via high speed communication links to many ships. I was assigned to a project group in the Navy that had the first operational towed array system installed. At the time it was called "Interim Towed Array Surveillance System" (ITASS) and the first ship to receive the equipment was the USS Van Voorhis, followed by two other DE's of the same class. This was back in 1970. The system has evolved and has been improved and is now standard equipment on most Navy combat vessels and subs. It's one of several methods for detecting and locating surface ships and submarines. There are others currently deployed and being developed. Blue/Green laser technology continues to be explored for sub detection and communication purposes. Don't forget the P-3's and their replacements. My niece is now piloting 'test bed' P-3's, and the stuff is so classified she won't even tell her dad what it's about. I recently read that the P-8A Poseidon (replacement for the P3 Orion) is having a few teething problems with some of it's systems. Once they get them sorted out it should be a very capable ASW platform. Why bother with an expensive submarine when you can disable or sink a carrier with an array of missiles fired from the backs of trucks? Funny. Carriers don't get anywhere near within range of truck mounted missiles and even if they did and were hit the damage would be minimal. I agree ... a sustained attack of much more potent, long range missiles, especially if nuclear armed, would be a serious threat but the task forces that accompany the carriers are well equipped with defensive systems. Nothing is foolproof but a carrier isn't that easy to sink .. or even render totally inoperable. |
If this weren't so sad...
On 3/9/15 10:05 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/9/2015 9:45 AM, Keyser Sze wrote: On 3/9/15 9:41 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 3/9/2015 9:35 AM, John H. wrote: On Mon, 09 Mar 2015 04:17:35 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 3/8/2015 11:58 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Sun, 8 Mar 2015 17:08:19 -0700 (PDT), True North wrote: We used to read stories of our previous class of diesel electric submarines getting within torpedo range of 'merican carriers. Didn't realize the newer Upholder class did the same thing. BTW ..it was four submarines we took off British hands. Three are based in Halifax in various stages of operational readiness. === Those guys are so good at submarine tracking and identification that they probably knew they were coming 100 miles away. The propellor and hull noise of every ship and sub is totally unique, just like a finger print or DNA sample. There are world wide networks of underwater microphones that track ships and subs everywhere. The noise signature of every one is in a database. The US military system was called SOSUS. The stationary, land based SOSUS systems have been phased out in favor of a ship and sub mounted towed array system that can be used anywhere. It's a passive system and compares noise signatures to a library of signatures contained it it's computer system. It can detect and identify a vessel by name, it's location, speed, course, etc., and like other systems the data is networked via high speed communication links to many ships. I was assigned to a project group in the Navy that had the first operational towed array system installed. At the time it was called "Interim Towed Array Surveillance System" (ITASS) and the first ship to receive the equipment was the USS Van Voorhis, followed by two other DE's of the same class. This was back in 1970. The system has evolved and has been improved and is now standard equipment on most Navy combat vessels and subs. It's one of several methods for detecting and locating surface ships and submarines. There are others currently deployed and being developed. Blue/Green laser technology continues to be explored for sub detection and communication purposes. Don't forget the P-3's and their replacements. My niece is now piloting 'test bed' P-3's, and the stuff is so classified she won't even tell her dad what it's about. I recently read that the P-8A Poseidon (replacement for the P3 Orion) is having a few teething problems with some of it's systems. Once they get them sorted out it should be a very capable ASW platform. Why bother with an expensive submarine when you can disable or sink a carrier with an array of missiles fired from the backs of trucks? Funny. Carriers don't get anywhere near within range of truck mounted missiles and even if they did and were hit the damage would be minimal. I agree ... a sustained attack of much more potent, long range missiles, especially if nuclear armed, would be a serious threat but the task forces that accompany the carriers are well equipped with defensive systems. Nothing is foolproof but a carrier isn't that easy to sink .. or even render totally inoperable. If we've learned anything since 9-11, it should be that there is no such thing as a target that is invulnerable. There are hundreds of missile variations held by dozens of countries around the world, and some are guidable with heavy payload capabilities. -- Proud to be a Liberal. |
If this weren't so sad...
On Mon, 9 Mar 2015 06:51:38 -0700 (PDT), True North wrote:
On Monday, 9 March 2015 10:31:43 UTC-3, John H. wrote: I wonder what kick it gives them to misspell the name of a country. -- Quit being such a drama queen, Johnny. We're not making fun of the country's name...just how some of y'all talk. No. You're attempting to make fun of a country's name. What kick does it give you? -- Guns don't cause problems. Gun owner *behavior* causes problems. |
If this weren't so sad...
On Monday, 9 March 2015 13:16:09 UTC-3, John H. wrote:
On Mon, 9 Mar 2015 06:51:38 -0700 (PDT), True North wrote: On Monday, 9 March 2015 10:31:43 UTC-3, John H. wrote: I wonder what kick it gives them to misspell the name of a country. -- Quit being such a drama queen, Johnny. We're not making fun of the country's name...just how some of y'all talk. No. You're attempting to make fun of a country's name. What kick does it give you? -- Yeah sure..Drama Queen...read above again.... |
If this weren't so sad...
On 3/9/15 12:41 PM, True North wrote:
On Monday, 9 March 2015 13:16:09 UTC-3, John H. wrote: On Mon, 9 Mar 2015 06:51:38 -0700 (PDT), True North wrote: On Monday, 9 March 2015 10:31:43 UTC-3, John H. wrote: I wonder what kick it gives them to misspell the name of a country. -- Quit being such a drama queen, Johnny. We're not making fun of the country's name...just how some of y'all talk. No. You're attempting to make fun of a country's name. What kick does it give you? -- Yeah sure..Drama Queen...read above again.... It's funny that Johnny and his buds are upset by that but not by the horrific things Republicans are doing to this country. -- Proud to be a Liberal. |
If this weren't so sad...
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:45 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com