Judge Limits Navy Sonar Experiments

Los Angeles Times ^ | 8/26/2003 | Kenneth R. Weiss

[hchutch]

Is this system necessary? Well, the folks at DOD seem to think so, and even the judge has said the Navy needs it. But she won't allow the training to allow for its proficient use in war time.

We're gonna lose lives on this one. Mark my words.

[Kenton]

This is like a Federal judge banning the military from using bullets because they are dangerous. Expect this ruling to go noplace.

[hchutch]

FYI ping. This is NOT good news, IMHO.

[Pikamax]

the heck???
THis is an abomination.

[WestPacSailor]

I'm still not clear on how a U.S. judge can order the Navy to NOT do something they want to do OUTSIDE of her jurisdiction? Doesn't the Navy answer to the SECDEF and, ultimately, the President?

[mewzilla]

Laporte's another Toon appointee. Toon's just the gift that keeps on giving...

[Ff--150]

I'm still not clear on how a U.S. judge can order the Navy to NOT do something they want to do OUTSIDE of her jurisdiction?

Because she is a judge, and therefore honored, nobility in manner of speaking. Being honored places her above the Constitution or the military.

[ClearCase_guy]

Yeah, we have three branches of government, arranged in a system of checks and balances -- which means that everyone has to do what the judicial branch says (NOT!)

[CholeraJoe]

What's she going to do? Send Federal Marshals to arrest the ship's captain? This order has no force of law.

[WestPacSailor]

That's the beauty of her ruling. She gets the great publicity that goes with her liberal slant. She's seen as a 'save the whales' environazi AND the Navy gets to test it's sonar anyway.

See, the DoD has lawyers already working on a way around her ruling. The President declares the testing essential for national security, the Navy conducts the test and the judge makes friends with the granola-eaters. Everybody wins.

[ctlpdad]

everybody wins except taxpayers who have to pay for this wast of time & $$ BS

[WestPacSailor]

everybody wins except taxpayers who have to pay for this wast of time & $$ BS

Yeah, the taxpayers do seem to always get the big srewola.

[Tallguy]

Just watched "Crimson Tide" last night. For those of you that didn't see the movie, the drama centered around a conflict between the CO and the XO and whether they should confirm a missile launch order.

I guess now a sub skipper is going to have to "float the buoy" to ask "pretty please, may I turn my active sonar on?"

[LiteKeeper]

INTREP - ANTI-AMERICAN DEFENSE

[GovernmentShrinker]

Let's remember the input of a freeper who has substantial first-hand knowledge of this topic:

From this thread http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/938185/posts

I just got this ping, thanks Hutch. Unfortunately, you MAY not like my opinions on the topic.

First, my bona fides: I have ten years-and-counting as a sonar operator (what we call an Acoustic AW) on board P-3 ORION ASW aircraft, and something like 2,500 hors in type. I've tracked numerous friendly AND unfriendly submarines, nuclear and diesel, using both passive AND active SONAR systems, and have, on occaision, used cuing from SURTASS ships. Oh, and I also like whales...they're pretty nice people, really. I have whiled many hours onstation away listening to their calls when the subs failed to turn up.

Okay, that out of the way, I have to say that I have a pretty low overall opinion of SURTASS, indeed, of most large-scale active systems. In an entire North Atlantic deployment, SURTASS was never able to put us onto a target with ANY degree of accuracy. We could have gotten the same results using tried-and-true passive searches, possibly even better.

Dear Leader's boats? The ChiComs? Please. They are well known to be like underwater freight trains when operating. No exotic systems are needed to find THEM, trust me, just good operators and a few (relatively inexpensive) sonobouys.

My own opinion of why these large-scale active systems were developed (and ALL of them are still "in development", that is, not perfected) to counter what was expected to be the next generation of stealthy Soviet submarines, which were feared to be too quiet for passive sensors to detect, and CERTAINLY too silent for us Enlisted puke operators to deal with.

Rubbish. Not only was that false, as a properly-trained and experienced operator can be, along with his similarly-trained crew, perfectly capable of finding anything worth finding in the Deep Blue, but the Soviet Union collapsed, and with it all plans for any "Red Octobers" there might have been (and that IS how old some of these systems are, BTW.). The systems were kept in development because a LOT of senior officers were enamored with them. I assure you, the operators were not.

Bottom line? In my professional opinion, for the current threat(diesel-electric submarines operated by third-world navies in littoral environments), LFA-type systems simply do not provide the accuracy and certainty that older, more proven passive systems(SOSUS, anyone? Hello?), like (ahem) Marittime Patrol Aviation do, and cost a whole LOT of money which would be better spent on maintaining aircraft and training operators. Therefore, considering the fact that some whale species ARE endangered, and the fact that the deaths that result are brutally painful to the point of cruelty, the LFA systems simply aren't worth it.

I'm Certainly no PETA pansy, but I have watched whales through observation windows for hours, and heard them over vast distances. I cannot in good conscience support dragging them into our conflicts, especially when the benefits are so weak.

SONAR operators and crews can do this, and we DON'T kill some of the most magnificent species on Earth to do it. The ONLY people I want to kill are the Bad Guys. Give US the money being spent on LFA, let us use it to train our people well, and let us have at it. Between us and the bubbleheads, your sub threat will cease to exist in short order. Of THAT, at least, I can assure you.

30 posted on 07/01/2003 5:04 PM PDT by Long Cut (Any time now...)

[WestPacSailor]

Just watched "Crimson Tide" last night.

I went to see that movie when it was first out in the theaters. I got up and walked out about 1/2 way through. Terribly inacurate protrayal of the Navy in general and the submarine service in particular. The whole movie was a steaming pile of dung.

[WestPacSailor]

Dear Leader's boats? The ChiComs? Please. They are well known to be like underwater freight trains when operating. No exotic systems are needed to find THEM, trust me, just good operators and a few (relatively inexpensive) sonobouys.

Too true. However, the Admirals at the top (very few submariners among them) have bought into this "we need super sonar" line and are all too used to receiving bennies from the contractors for supporting the programs that line the pockets of Electric Boat, General Dynamics, and the like.

As for tracking the Korean or Chinese boats, anybody with a soup can to press up against the hull will hear these boats coming before they even leave the pier.

[hchutch]

If a military requirement does not exist, then Rumsfeld should cancel it, as he cancelled the Crusader. Yet this program has not been cancelled. Why is that?

It should be noted that in the article, the judge looked over classified data that convinced her the Navy had a legitimate need for the SURTASS LFA system. I do not know if Long Cut is privy to this data, or if he can even mention that he is privy to it, but this judge was convinced to ACCEPT the Navy's determination that this system is needed.

[WestPacSailor]

For anyone interested this link will give you a good, concise overview of SURTASS LFA.

[GovernmentShrinker]

1) The Navy is not above presenting biased information to support its pet projects.

2) The judge acknowledged that the system appears to have some military benefits, but she "ruled that the Navy and the National Marine Fisheries Service failed to consider alternatives that could shield whales and other marine life from these loud sounds", nor did she find the Navy's argument so compelling as to allow them to pursue testing and deployment without restrictions.

Her ruling sounds reasonable to me, boiling down to an order to proceed slowly and carefully with research on this system, and fully explore alternatives and modifications which would mitigate its harmful effects. Meanwhile, until improvements can be made, her ruling permits use of the system when it's really needed to deal with immediate military threats.