There is only 1, but big problem - the most richest and influencial countries of EU (Germany, France, Italy, Spain) dont fear russian military might right now, and have rather good relations with Russia. Other countries, what DO fear Russia (Poland, Baltic states, some others) dont have enouth money and influence, they fear Russia for long time and everyone in EU is pretty tired of it anyway.
Russia wants to dismantle nuclear subs by 2010
- Thread starter mysterious
- Start date
- Status
Yes, GB didn't. But they are even more connected to USA than the rest of EU - so they even less need a huge weapon stockpile to fight off evil russkies
F-15 Eagle
New Member
I cant wait until Russia builds 6 new nuclear aircraft carriers. It is nice to see Russia is finally coming out of the dark days of the 1990s. Russia is now the number 2 military power in the world after the U.S.
Heh. I also cant wait. In the sence, i will be most likely dead by very old age till then.
I dont think Russia will have 6 carriers in the next 30 years.
Just a wild idea
For nuclear deterrent, why not scrap SSBNs altogether? The US will always have enough SSNs to track each SSBN russia can afford to make.
But what if Russia instead deploys small advanced diesels, each with one or two nuclear tipped cruise missiles, or a single SLBM if they could make one small enough? At the fraction of the cost of a SSBN, you can then saturate the ASW of the USN; forcing it to spend more money to build more SSNs (which would be good in a war of financial attrition).
As long as the USN isn't sure of being able to sink all of those boats before they can launch, you've got a deterrent.
For nuclear deterrent, why not scrap SSBNs altogether? The US will always have enough SSNs to track each SSBN russia can afford to make.
But what if Russia instead deploys small advanced diesels, each with one or two nuclear tipped cruise missiles, or a single SLBM if they could make one small enough? At the fraction of the cost of a SSBN, you can then saturate the ASW of the USN; forcing it to spend more money to build more SSNs (which would be good in a war of financial attrition).
As long as the USN isn't sure of being able to sink all of those boats before they can launch, you've got a deterrent.
New generation UDT includes torpedoes such as the ADCAP CBASS which are designed to pursue diesel subs in the littorals or in greenwater.
There is also a move towards mobile sea mines. eg in 2004 I attended a sub warfare conf where there was discussion about a 21inch mine/torpedo which was able to traverse a series of waypoints over a 36hr period.
Whats the latest news on the Russian Meditteranean deployment? Where is the Kutznetsov now? Recently i read form Pravda.ru that Russian navy has started excersizing with Libya's navy, but there was no mention of the kutznetsov being involved. It should be the ships from the Black sea fleet.
Or they'll randezvous with the CBG.
Russian Warships Cruise With Italians
Russian Warships Cruise With Italians
Yes, the White Sea and other shallow seas in the Russian Arctic can be used as bastions, under cover of land-based ASW assets, not to mention SSKs/SSNs. The limiting factor is the range of SLBMs- not all areas in CONUS can be reached from those waters.
The most interesting detail if that article to me is that no monitoring by US patrol aircraft was mentioned though British and Canadians were.
That is a long flight from Canada though. Depending on the route the Russians took (I'm assuming they didn't go very far out into the Atlantic) they would be on the very cusp of the Aurora's range or out of range entirely. So the Canadians would have had have used aerial refueling. A very professional and apparently successful operation by our northern neighbors. :canada
That is a long flight from Canada though. Depending on the route the Russians took (I'm assuming they didn't go very far out into the Atlantic) they would be on the very cusp of the Aurora's range or out of range entirely. So the Canadians would have had have used aerial refueling. A very professional and apparently successful operation by our northern neighbors. :canada
The USA ability to track foreign SSBN is highly exaggerated. It is very hard to find a sub (especially in polar waters), and it is even harder to do it unnoticed. Any SSBN if it wants to throw off any suspected "tail" just need to accelerate to 15+ knots - at that speed it is impossible to silently follow a target. There are also some other technicues to make 90% sure noone follows. There is always small chance to fail - but it is, well, small and do not play major role if 5+ SSBN's are in constant patrol.
Chrom:
Have you ever served on a submarine of any type?
Have you served on an SSBN?
Do you know anything about sonar?
It sure doesnt sound like it.
I have and do know.
Any SSBN that accelerates to 15 + knots is effectively mission killed during peace time and in a shooting war not only is mission killed but would be nothing but a large noisy target. Life expectancy: 0.
"There are also some other technicues to make 90% sure no one follows."
Lets hear some of these.
"The USA ability to track foreign SSBN is highly exaggerated."
Keep thinking that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Makes the USN SSN forces missions all that much easier to undertake successfully.
Have you ever served on a submarine of any type?
Have you served on an SSBN?
Do you know anything about sonar?
It sure doesnt sound like it.
I have and do know.
Any SSBN that accelerates to 15 + knots is effectively mission killed during peace time and in a shooting war not only is mission killed but would be nothing but a large noisy target. Life expectancy: 0.
"There are also some other technicues to make 90% sure no one follows."
Lets hear some of these.
"The USA ability to track foreign SSBN is highly exaggerated."
Keep thinking that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Makes the USN SSN forces missions all that much easier to undertake successfully.
Last edited:
Yes-yes. Care to elaborate that statements? How such sub will be mission killed? Large noisy target... common. Any sub what will try to follow will be exactly as noisy. And then again - how it is easy to track SSBN under ice? Can you honestly answer?
One of the few people in here who is qualified to answer questions on subs and underwater warfare is RickUSN.
He is also unlikely to go into the exact detail of how underwater warfare is conducted.
Have nothing against it, but statements like "сountry XXX can easely track ALL SSBN's of country yyy" without in-depth explanation sound very, very suspect.
“Care to elaborate that statements?”
Sure but if you have actually served on submarines and SSBNS specifically you would already know why this is so..
But you haven’t have you?
You’re the one who needs to be honest.
“but statements like "сountry XXX can easely track ALL SSBN's of country yyy" without in-depth explanation sound very, very suspect.””
I never said any such thing or even implied it.
This is what requires and “in-depth explanation”:
"The USA ability to track foreign SSBN is highly exaggerated."
But Im not holding my breath.
“Large noisy target... common.”
Not for an SSBN that successfully carries out its mission.
“Any sub what will try to follow will be exactly as noisy.”
No it wont.
And even if it was. So? It’s the hunter not the hunted. It will also still have the ability to track the SSBN but the SSBN will have lost all ability to track the SSN.
And you still haven’t answered this:
“"There are also some other technicues to make 90% sure no one follows."
Why?
If you actually knew you would already have enlightened us with your expertise.
So again Im not holding my breath.
The USN has decades of experience with under ice operations.
Whats your point?
As far as Im concerned you’re a troll and a blatantly dishonest one at that.
Again when you provide an answer for this we can continue this discussion.:
“"There are also some other technicues to make 90% sure no one follows."
You’ve made outlandish, untruthful statements and false accusations.
“very, very suspect’ yep that fits you to a T.
For those of you who are wondering.:
An SSBN that accelerates to 15+ kts isn’t difficult to track.
In order for it to have time to launch missiles it requires non-detection.
An SSBN traveling at 15+ kts of course has failed in this regard.
Nor can it launch missiles at 15+ kts or anywhere close.
Its mission killed.
An SSBN is very vulnerable when it goes into launch mode.
I may be able to “elaborate” more but the above should be sufficient.
But I bet I never,ever get an answer for this:
""There are also some other technicues to make 90% sure no one follows."
Of course accelerating to 15 kts isnt a "technicue" to make "sure no one follows".
Though I can hardly wait to read what "other" flights of fantasy you can manufacture.
Sure but if you have actually served on submarines and SSBNS specifically you would already know why this is so..
But you haven’t have you?
You’re the one who needs to be honest.
“but statements like "сountry XXX can easely track ALL SSBN's of country yyy" without in-depth explanation sound very, very suspect.””
I never said any such thing or even implied it.
This is what requires and “in-depth explanation”:
"The USA ability to track foreign SSBN is highly exaggerated."
But Im not holding my breath.
“Large noisy target... common.”
Not for an SSBN that successfully carries out its mission.
“Any sub what will try to follow will be exactly as noisy.”
No it wont.
And even if it was. So? It’s the hunter not the hunted. It will also still have the ability to track the SSBN but the SSBN will have lost all ability to track the SSN.
And you still haven’t answered this:
“"There are also some other technicues to make 90% sure no one follows."
Why?
If you actually knew you would already have enlightened us with your expertise.
So again Im not holding my breath.
The USN has decades of experience with under ice operations.
Whats your point?
As far as Im concerned you’re a troll and a blatantly dishonest one at that.
Again when you provide an answer for this we can continue this discussion.:
“"There are also some other technicues to make 90% sure no one follows."
You’ve made outlandish, untruthful statements and false accusations.
“very, very suspect’ yep that fits you to a T.
For those of you who are wondering.:
An SSBN that accelerates to 15+ kts isn’t difficult to track.
In order for it to have time to launch missiles it requires non-detection.
An SSBN traveling at 15+ kts of course has failed in this regard.
Nor can it launch missiles at 15+ kts or anywhere close.
Its mission killed.
An SSBN is very vulnerable when it goes into launch mode.
I may be able to “elaborate” more but the above should be sufficient.
But I bet I never,ever get an answer for this:
""There are also some other technicues to make 90% sure no one follows."
Of course accelerating to 15 kts isnt a "technicue" to make "sure no one follows".
Though I can hardly wait to read what "other" flights of fantasy you can manufacture.
- Status