Posted on 02/12/2010 10:48:29 PM PST by OneVike
Thanks in large part to the anti military sentiment that prevails in Washington, from both sides of the isle, America is losing the war of technical advancement. What you will see in this video is a submarine from Sweden the, NemoSaltadSobrius, that cannot be detected, and even worse it has repeatedly sunk our best and most powerful naval ships in mock war games. Check out this report out of San Diego by Chuck Henry, who reports that America is attempting to figure out how to catch in before our enemies discover the secret of its elusiveness.
Ever since WWII, America has been a dominant force upon the high seas. We have become so advanced in our military technology that the Soviet Union eventually collapsed, in large part because Ronald Reagan would not back down against them. In honor of his accomplishments and great leadership, congress named the worlds largest aircraft carrier after him, the USS Ronald Reagan. Well it has been 22 years since Reagan left office, and while we have been able to hold our status as the worlds most powerful military the world has ever seen, those days could be coming to an end.
high seas. The Swedish sub "NemoSaltadSobrius" beats us in ever war game we played against it.
Swedish Submarine the NemoSaltadSobrius
The nightmare scenario is that one of these shows up near one of our shorelines, and launches a missile attack against one of our cities. Still, that sub has to get close enough, which means its crew has to navigate the boat through large stretches of ocean, and then they have to successfully launch the attack. There's a lot of coordination, and a lot of logistics involved. We have other means of detecting them; e.g., satellites and aircraft; hopefully, that would be good enough to ward off an attack.
21 years, 3 weeks, three days.
How much of their military budget goes to diversity and sensitivity training?
the Chinese have already done the same thing
Sweden has a modern high-tech navy staffed with highly trained personnel. Their quality is at least as good as our own.
Looks like Iran is going to be able to furnish one before long.
The camel-jocks will have a real tough time getting their version of Fat Boy to fly on top their 10 FOOT “worm” missle. Tootseyroll Pop.
On the Swede’s sub, does anyone remember that D/Es have to surface to run the D and recharge? In a real shootout these super-stealthy D/Es would turn into excellent fish habitats long before they got near the carrier fleet, unless some dem like nobama was writing RoEs.
You base that opinion on.....?
Carriers no longer have fixed wing ASW aircraft with the retirement of the S-3. Land based ASW isn't in much better shape.
“Get real. It is a totally insignificant war game. This sub will be long gone if it goes in a real fight with the US Navy.”
I used to have a football coach that would think that was the most idiotic statement he ever read. Practice to win, play to win.
Actually no, the German Panzers (Panzer III, IV (Panther) and V (Tiger)) were usually more than a match for the Shermans (our tank). The Shermans were thinly armored, and because they used gasoline had the tendency to spectacularly burn up when hit. The Shermans were nicknamed Zippos by the soldiers who crewed them.
German armor being superior, even direct hits were not always effective on Panzers. Hits to the front usually deflected. It took hits below the turret on the sides or to the rear to destroy them.
However, we produced so many more Shermans than the Germans Panzers, German armor was often overwhelmed. However, it was air supremacy that usually crippled the effectiveness of German armor units.
IMO, the best tank of WWII was the T-34, it was highly mobile, armored, heavily armed, and simple enough to mass produce. In fact, the Germans gave serious thought to simply copying it.
“William Tecumsah Sherman was a d***yankee.”
Thank goodness!
They have helicopters. I wonder if a Navy version of the V-22 Osprey might be useful in ASW?
I can remember when the V-22 was being talked about as a replacement for the S-3. In addition to being able to perform the usual ASW detection with sonobuoys it was suggested it could also utilize the dipping sonar of a helicopter. But it was cost prohibitive. When the Soviet Union fell, ASW dropped by the wayside.
Ping!
1. When our superior intelligence indicates a REAL threat to one of our carriers, the picket goes up. Nothing can get within 100miles of a Carrier if the battle group commander doesn't want it to. The ONLY way to get to it tactically is for a sub to sit still and hope the carrier passes close enough to get off a shot.
2. In a REAL war, carriers will not be within 200miles of the beach...and certainly not in the Persian Gulf.
3. The price of sinking a US Capital Ship, historically, has been total war. Nukes and all. Great deterrent.
What these reports leave out is how coreographed these exercises are. They’re designed specifically to put friendly forces at a disadvantage. SSNs are noise augmented. Certain systems or capabilities can’t be used. Forces out of position. And then there are the stovepipes, moving havens buffers and other and water restrictions that are put in place for safety reasons to ensure that submerged submarines can operate in proximity to each other.
It all makes for a valuable training experience, but one has to resist the urge to read too much into it.
It is well known by every adversarial navy of the world, that the price of a US Aircraft Carrier is nuclear war. We arm ALL of them with nukes, dozens of 'em.
The brash little country with the DE boat hoping to make a name for itself, will do certainly that.
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.