Comparison of different nuclear systems: left, the SNLE (Redoutable type) with the M4 missile; right, the SNLE-NG (Triomphant type) with the present M45 missile and the future M51 missile.
To: Doohickey; judicial meanz; submarinerswife; PogySailor; chasio649; gobucks; Bottom_Gun; Dog Gone; ..
2 posted on
10/12/2006 7:21:11 AM PDT by
SmithL
(Where are we going? . . . . And why are we in this handbasket????)
To: sukhoi-30mki
I'm amazed they didn't name the sub "Le Surrender" instead of "Le Terrible."
4 posted on
10/12/2006 7:29:32 AM PDT by
CholeraJoe
(USAF Air Rescue "That others may live.")
To: sukhoi-30mki
Hopefully, the new sub will be better built than the last triumph of French naval engineering, the aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle, which took an obscene 7 years to get into service after it was launched, in large part because its propellers "broke" (I'm not kidding) the first time they were used in sea trials.
5 posted on
10/12/2006 7:31:52 AM PDT by
CivilWarguy
(CivilWarGuy)
To: sukhoi-30mki
25 knots submerged + depth in excess of 300 meters?Sounds impressive.Any idea how that compares to what we have?
6 posted on
10/12/2006 7:32:05 AM PDT by
Thombo2
To: sukhoi-30mki
I've read that France's nuclear submarine "force" has as bad a performance record as their nuclear aircraft carrier (the propeller fell off on the maiden deployment on that and it's been out of commission more than at sea since). They probably bought an old Soviet sub and put plastic attacments on it to make it look new...
7 posted on
10/12/2006 7:34:58 AM PDT by
Phsstpok
(Often wrong, but never in doubt)
To: sukhoi-30mki
Isn't "French Naval Deterrent" an oxymoron?
8 posted on
10/12/2006 7:40:59 AM PDT by
JackHawk
("Some Times; War is the answer!")
To: sukhoi-30mki
Memo to French Navy; submarines do better under water...
That is all.
To: sukhoi-30mki
10 posted on
10/12/2006 7:55:22 AM PDT by
ccc_jr
(Si vis pacem, para bellum - Flavius Vegetius Renatus c. 375 AD)
To: sukhoi-30mki; patton; Doohickey; sionnsar; Cyber Liberty; Congressman Billybob; neverdem
The EMP capability scares the hell out of me.
A single blast is trouble. Very nasty trouble for a single city, but it is localized.
EMP? Against civilian targets - against US! - could devastate economically and financially (since CIVILIAN EMP targets are NOT shielded) would knock the country back to the 1950's.
Now, what country, that the French socialists/communists hate, is threatened by EMP blasts?
11 posted on
10/12/2006 8:13:42 AM PDT by
Robert A Cook PE
(I can only donate monthly, but Hillary's ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!)
To: sukhoi-30mki
The French Navy deploys their new
Intercontinental Cheese-eating Ballistic Surrender Missile.
13 posted on
10/12/2006 8:23:54 AM PDT by
LIConFem
(Just opened a new seafood restaurant in Great Britain, called "Squid Pro Quid")
To: sukhoi-30mki
Got to wonder who this deterrent is directed against.
14 posted on
10/12/2006 8:26:37 AM PDT by
RightWhale
(Repeal the law of the excluded middle)
To: sukhoi-30mki
A "top naval official who asked "not to be identified" informed me the French pre-launch check sheet has a step to temporarily lower their white flag so the launching missile does not become entangled.
15 posted on
10/12/2006 8:36:41 AM PDT by
ryan71
("You can hear it through the coconut telegraph...")
To: sukhoi-30mki
expanding the range of situations where France may consider that the use of nuclear weapons is justified. Which is?
18 posted on
10/12/2006 8:58:37 AM PDT by
Gideon7
To: sukhoi-30mki
20 posted on
10/12/2006 1:09:06 PM PDT by
UCANSEE2
(It's turtles all the way down.)
To: sukhoi-30mki
22 posted on
10/12/2006 1:17:21 PM PDT by
dfwgator
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
