Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: GingisK
I am sure that such a weapon would place the sub in danger.

Then why use it or even develop it? Especially in the mid-1990's when submarines can dive deeper, run quieter, move faster, and maneuver easier than the subs of World War II? Such a weapon makes zero sense, and any submariner would confirm.

251 posted on 06/14/2016 12:39:21 PM PDT by Lower Deck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 249 | View Replies ]


To: Lower Deck; GingisK
Then why use it or even develop it?

The information I read said that the Navy immediately abandoned 'testing' of the 'missile technology' they were using at the time.

275 posted on 06/14/2016 3:31:56 PM PDT by UCANSEE2 (Lost my tagline on Flight MH370. Sorry for the inconvenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 251 | View Replies ]

To: Lower Deck
The Germans were desperate once the U-Boats started getting knocked off by airplanes, especially the Catalina PBY. They could only dive to 160 meters, so they could be seen from the air under certain conditions. They had a few years of blinding success, followed by a firestorm of defeat.

So far the only documentation I can find was a mention of trying to fit their ground-based AA missile to a sub. Those things were too large, and couldn't really take exposure to water at all, let alone at depth.

I would have really hated to be a German submariner after the first half of WWII.

276 posted on 06/14/2016 3:32:31 PM PDT by GingisK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 251 | View Replies ]

To: Lower Deck; GingisK
Then why use it or even develop it? Especially in the mid-1990's when submarines can dive deeper, run quieter, move faster, and maneuver easier than the subs of World War II? Such a weapon makes zero sense, and any submariner would confirm.

"On display, according to Graduate’s source, was a secret anti-aircraft missile developed for the Seawolf class of attack submarines. The Navy planned to use the missile to defend the subs when sailing ahead of the fleet without air cover, especially in shallow water when vulnerable to shore-based defenses."

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/is-u-s-navy-coming-clean-on-twa-800/#W3sVHu9k5wLTs9fD.99

340 posted on 06/15/2016 4:31:27 PM PDT by UCANSEE2 (Lost my tagline on Flight MH370. Sorry for the inconvenience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 251 | View Replies ]

To: Lower Deck
The only substantial thing I can find so far concerning German U-Boats in WWII launching missiles is this: U-Boat missiles

I'm still hunting the AA missiles. Maybe those were manufactured in my mind based upon these. That aside, it isn't much of stretch to assume anti-aircraft missiles could be fired from a sub, given the fact that cruse missiles can be fired from torpedo tubes. Germany was developing self-guided AA missiles. Given today's electronics, it isn't difficult to image a guidance system locating aircraft autonomously.

Still, there is no reason whatsoever to suspect such a thing in the TWA800 incident.

391 posted on 06/16/2016 6:33:31 PM PDT by GingisK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 251 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson