Posted on 06/21/2007 7:37:25 AM PDT by SShultz460
Methinks Mr Burleson just received his dolphins, or is an armchair admiral playing too much “Harpoon”.
Considering that the Caspian Sea is land-locked then yeah, I feel pretty confident saying that we haven't.
It is nice to think of the Korean Peninsula surrounded by some of these undersea battleships. North Korea has enough artillery within range of Seoul that ten of thousands of rounds could fall in an hour if hostilities commenced. Being able to put 150 X 4 cruise missiles into the air quickly could be significant.
The Russians have had supersonic cruise missiles for decades. U.S. defenses have been designed for them.
I'd say getting within 5 miles of a carrier constitutes stalking, wouldn't you?
My first CO on my first boat had a brass set. When you can read the names of the pilots and RIO’s on the planes landing on the Enterprise, you KNOW you’re close.
TOO close, in fact.
It's a question of intent. If I were a Chinese sub skipper who had stalked a U.S. carrier then the last thing I would do would be surface within site of the target and advertise my capabilities. I truly think that there is every likelyhood that Chinese skipper had no clue he was as close as he was.
You (and the author) assume that the USN was caught flatfooted by the bold, daring gesture of the gallant PLN, to which I call bull****.
Calling it "stalking" is on the order of saying that mice "stalk" snakes. Look, the mouse walks right up next to the snake! What a daring gesture by the mouse!
What submariners don’t say is that submarines are targets.
L
Interesting. But it overlooks the modern long range patrol ASW aircraft. Those type of systems we CAN mass produce.
Carrier battle groups are not as vulnerable as the author would have you believe. A tremendously think defensive layer exists. Ideally, the best defense is a good offense.
Offensively, the US Navy trains to eliminate threats before they can be implemented. The Iraqi Air Force is a good example.
Defensively, there have been significant improvements in ECM, radar, and weapon systems used to counter cruise missiles. Even highly maneuverable, fast ASCM’s can now be defeated. But once more, the best defense is to destroy the launching platform.
By the way, what foreign navy is prepared to get into an all out shooting match with the US Navy? Russians? Not even close. Chinese? No, but maybe some day, and we’d better prepare for it.
The Falklands War? A vintage WWII Argentine cruiser was a sitting duck, all by itself, with no ASW assets. True, submarines have some distinct advantages against surface combatants, but a determined, well trained ASW group can make a submariner’s life miserable, even short.
As far as submarines forcing surface ships into port once the shooting starts...Ask the German worlfpacks in the Atlantic during WWI about that. Yes, submarine technology is far better now, but so is surface ship technology.
Our surface forces are vital. Submarines are not and never will be a substitute for surface forces. The truth is, both are crucial and the US Navy functions as one, gaining synergies from both.
The Chinese sub may have gotten close to Kittyhawk, but given her peacetime posture, it was not overly surprising.
Doing the same during war is different.
I hope not.
No doubt.
There was absolutely NO reason for the Chinese skipper to knowingly show himself. By doing so, he compromised whatever tactical and technical prowess they obtained.
It’s not Chinese culture to broadcast their capabilities. They consider patience and time to be on their side.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.