Tomorrow you will watch the destruction of an American Aircraft Carrier

Northeast Intelligence Network ^ | 03/29/04 | Source

[Rightone]

Arabic posting:

[Qwinn]

Attacking a soft target, even successfully, -is- a dumbass failure.

I'd have a lot more respect for a guy who went against a hard target, even if he failed. To use the word "terrorist" against someone who went after something like an aircraft carrier really isn't technically accurate. That person has earned the right to be called "enemy combatant". I could at least respect them as a somewhat honorable enemy, though of course still an enemy. The ones who go after civilians have no honor and don't deserve even the dignity of insult.

Qwinn

[middie]

They can't !!

[Long Cut]

They also cruise with OTHER ships, which are VERY quiet, and are almost never seen.

[onyx]

Yes, I received your last mail.
Not too heavy at all.
Printer is giving me trouble.
I need to print it for you know who.
Give me a moment and then look at FR mail.
I need to tell you a thang or three.

[Spruce]

If a US carrier is atacked with cutting-edge Chinese or Russian anti-ship weapons we will have a WHOLE different ballgame!

[Fitzcarraldo]

Given what you said, I offer a scenerio: An unknown object pops off the ocean bottom and appears to be rising towards the carrier from below, and is picked up by sonar. The decision is made to launch torpedoes from an escort sub to destroy what ever it is. Unfortunately, all this action takes place under the carrier.

[RandallFlagg]

Ahhh yes. The CIWS (See-Whiz)

Acronym for

Close
In
Weapons
System

However. Known to the Gunner's Mates onboard MY old ship:

Christ
It
Won't
Shoot!!!!

[Scott from the Left Coast]

An airliner getting to a Carrier. Hell, they're made to control the skies for many, many miles around themselves.

First, you'd have to get their entire air wing drunk. An airliner (or four or ten for that matter) would have as much chance of getting within 20 miles of a carrier as I'd have of getting a date with Miss America.

[Long Cut]

First, no sonar I know of could detect and identify such an object.

Second, the device you posit exists...it's called a captor mine, and it can be activated by sound, water pressure, or magnetic sensors. It releases a torpedo.

Third, a sub must surface to communicate with the carrier reliably.

Fourth, the captor mine must be utilized in relatively shallow water to be effective...less than 100 fathoms.

Fifth, your enemy MUST know EXACTLY where your ship will pass to make it effective, and carriers try very hard to avoid predictability.

Just so you know, I've been a Navy SONAR operator, both active and passive, for ten years now.

[GeronL]

I got that message 130 posts ago =o)

But we do see what security problems can bring with the USS Cole.

[Bullish]

I never said carriers had sonar. I did mention that WITH modern sonar they'd never get near them.

[isom35]

someone already on board?

[Long Cut]

Oh, and one other thing...once a torp is running, it CAN be easily detected, but it cannot be "shot down". It has to be outmanuevered (not in a carrier!) or decoyed away.

[Long Cut]

"With modern sonar the "mini-sub" could never even get within 5 miles of a carrier."

I wouldn't bet on it.

[Fitzcarraldo]

[Fitzcarraldo]

[Long Cut]

Unfortunately, with modern SUBS (including diesel-powered) and modern TORPEDOS (which the diesels have) they don't need to get within five miles.

Hence, the friendly subs, the helicopters, and, not to toot my own horn, but the P-3 ORION, my platform.

Carriers are indeed extremely difficult to destroy. But it's not impossible for a determined enemy with resources.

[Jeff Head]

If it was credible, they would announce this after their attack.

Announcing it the day before almost ensures that it is not credible.

It would have been like announcing the 911 attacks on 910.

[TFMcGuire]

They couldn't even sink the Cole let alone a flattop.

The threat is certainly sobering and needs to be taken seriously.

One would think the prudent thing to do would be to get under way.

None of the scenarios presented seem to my limited cerebral abilities a realistic threat.

I think the gentleman who is betting the 20 bucks is safe.

I think this threat is psychological warfare brought to us from the beneficent adherents of the "Religion of Peace."

However, Hope and pray all precautions are taken to protect our marines? on this ship.

[sd-joe]

>> "what in AQ's arsenal could possibly get close enough to an aircraft carrier that could destroy it?" <<

"Suitcase" nuke smuggled aboard and located at the right place.