Author |
Message |
Slaughter
| Posted on Wednesday, August 05, 2009 - 12:22 pm: |
|
Iranian subs off our coast would be news. Saying there are Russky subs off our coast is like saying that there is a bright light off on the Eastern horizon at sunrise. |
Lonewolfnavet
| Posted on Wednesday, August 05, 2009 - 12:23 pm: |
|
"How many US subs are off the coast of Russia?" The answer to that is..."None of course"..."Never has been"...Never will be", TRUST ME! |
Samiam
| Posted on Wednesday, August 05, 2009 - 01:55 pm: |
|
Iranian subs off our coast would be news. Yeah right, if they could ever get all three of their subs working...plus they're just Kilos. Yep, thanks to our local service men and women of VP-30 and their P-3's based here at Jacksonville Naval Air Station! I agree that Jax would be where we'd most likely fly our missions out of but it most definitely wouldn't be VP-30. That's a training squadron, and they would never fly missions on foreign subs. That would be left to VP-5, VP-45, and VP-16. Not to mention VP-26, VP-10, and VP-8 in Brunswick. I love those old planes. I'm still not liking the idea of the P-8 just yet...(plus, my job on the P-3 isn't even on the P-8) We shall see though, the P-3 is definitely in need of a replacement. Sorry for the mini-hijack, I personally don't think we should worry about these Russian subs, our Navy is well prepared to defend any aggression. Which they likely will never show. Just my $.02 -Sam |
Cityxslicker
| Posted on Wednesday, August 05, 2009 - 02:26 pm: |
|
What scourge of the seas has the highest concentration of operational bi-coastal mini subs capable of carrying up to 30 and putting them on target?...... Mickey Mouse. Not all intelligence is critical or strategic, some of it is damn mundane and trivial |
Cringblast
| Posted on Wednesday, August 05, 2009 - 09:50 pm: |
|
Drop, Now, Now, Now !!! C. |
Bluzm2
| Posted on Thursday, August 06, 2009 - 12:46 am: |
|
As some of you know, my son is/was in the Navy. As of last Tuesday, he' is home on terminal leave. He's officially done on the 21st. He spent the last 5 years on a ..... submarine as a sonar tech. Official word from my resident expert "BFD!". We OWN the oceans lock, stock and barrel. Period. That's all I can get out of him. That's enough for me. Brad One more thing, as he made the quote above, he was smirking and said "That class sub really is a noisy POS." (Message edited by bluzm2 on August 06, 2009) |
Samiam
| Posted on Thursday, August 06, 2009 - 09:01 am: |
|
We OWN the oceans lock, stock and barrel. Period. That's all I can get out of him. That's enough for me. Brad One more thing, as he made the quote above, he was smirking and said "That class sub really is a noisy POS." +1 from the P-3 Navy side! |
Bluzm2
| Posted on Thursday, August 06, 2009 - 09:21 am: |
|
Samiam, The subs off the coast are Akula class, not Kilos. Doesen't matter, they are both very noisy and VERY easy to track. On another note, someone above wondered who if it was Russians driving the boat. I wouldn't be surprised if the intel we have didin't include the captain and part of the crew roster.... |
Samiam
| Posted on Thursday, August 06, 2009 - 09:26 am: |
|
The subs off the coast are Akula class, not Kilos. Doesen't matter, they are both very noisy and VERY easy to track. I realize that, I was quoting a previous post (notice the blue text) regarding the thought that Iranian subs off the coast would be bigger news...which is laughable IMO. |
Slaughter
| Posted on Thursday, August 06, 2009 - 09:37 am: |
|
That is EXACTLY why Iranian subs would be news because we'd know when they left the GULF, a full 10 days before they arrived off our coastline. The Russians will always be off our coast in international waters as will the French, the Brits, the Israelis at times. (Message edited by slaughter on August 06, 2009) |
Moxnix
| Posted on Thursday, August 06, 2009 - 11:16 am: |
|
The older Russian subs also offered radiation to follow. That was 40 years ago, I defer to younger folk to tell me if they ever fixed that issue. Admiral Hyman G. Rickover visited a Russian sub; after leaving said his radiation badge showed he'd been exposed to more radiation on that visit than in his entire career with the US nuclear sub program. |
Bluzm2
| Posted on Thursday, August 06, 2009 - 11:53 am: |
|
Moxnix and others... There is a great book out on the cold war submarine activities. It's called "Blind Mans Bluff" Amazing read. It goes into detail of a number of incidents on both sides. What our guys did is nothing short of amazing. Plus they couldn't (still can't in some cases) even tell anyone about it. Good stuff. Maybe I can get my son to chime in. Brad |
Cityxslicker
| Posted on Thursday, August 06, 2009 - 03:10 pm: |
|
I can see the jet as an EP-3 replacement, I just have a hard time seeing how it can successfully loiter at slow speeds to get the data from the 'boys' . And a MAD boom out the back at 300 mph ?!? I never was good at engineering though. |
Samiam
| Posted on Thursday, August 06, 2009 - 04:49 pm: |
|
No slow speeds, and no MAD on the P-8... I don't quite agree with it either... |
Bhillberg
| Posted on Thursday, August 06, 2009 - 05:02 pm: |
|
This Russian sub thing isn't a big deal. The Russians have been lurking, testing the waters forever. A year ago they were staging hundreds of thousands of troops directly across the border from Republic of Georgia. Why is this a big deal? It isn't too well known that at the time they were doing that there were US service men doing a multi-national training evolution IN The Republic of Georgia. Russia figured we were up to something then. When I got back on American soil from the evolution Russia was already attacking Georgia. They waited for MOST of us (there were still a few batallions on the airfield) to leave and then they chose to attack. The thing is that they were monitoring us the entire time. If they had chosen to move a day earlier it would have been chaos as we were there to train as a rifle company, not go to war, so we didn't have all the assets we would have needed to fight the Commies. Just using this as an example though that Russia flexes a lot, just hasn't thrown a punch yet. Of course they thought we were flexing at the same time when we were only training with an Allied country. |
Buellinachinashop
| Posted on Thursday, August 06, 2009 - 05:23 pm: |
|
I'll go out to the coast, eat some Mexican, wade into the ocean and launch a few intercept subs of my own. |
Ratyson
| Posted on Thursday, August 06, 2009 - 05:55 pm: |
|
<-- Navy Vet. AW P3 Non-acoustic operator. My last squadron was VP-45. CAC-4. 1990 - 1992 There was a reason we came up with the patch.. If He's out there... |picture of Elvis| We'll find him. I loved my job. No more low and slow??? Bummer... Those were the days.. "MADMAN MADMAN MADMAN"... "Torpedo away". I'll go out to the coast, eat some Mexican, wade into the ocean and launch a few intercept subs of my own. Ooh.. Poopmarines! No one can match the power of the POOPEEDO!!} (Message edited by RATyson on August 06, 2009) |
Cityxslicker
| Posted on Thursday, August 06, 2009 - 07:55 pm: |
|
the jet really is a poor choice for the mission, Its just too damn fast and with a plat form that size your manueverability is toast. It was tough enough with the S-3s doing the job. Theres an unhappy bunch of pilots to brief/debrief. |
Slaughter
| Posted on Thursday, August 06, 2009 - 07:58 pm: |
|
(Conflict of interest alert here) but even a high-bypass turbofan is very ineffecient at low altitudes as compared to a prop. So much of the mission is down low (and we're talking low as nearly IN the spray of the ocean-low) - for HOURS |
Bhillberg
| Posted on Thursday, August 06, 2009 - 08:05 pm: |
|
but even a high-bypass turbofan is very ineffecient at low altitudes as compared to a prop I don't how true that is. The advantage to a prop is the variable pitch. You can scoop more or less air. On a high bypass fan you would have to be screaming at that low of a level as the fan blades normally don't have variable pitch (at least none I have seen) |
Samiam
| Posted on Friday, August 07, 2009 - 06:04 am: |
|
the jet really is a poor choice for the mission, Its just too damn fast and with a plat form that size your manueverability is toast. It was tough enough with the S-3s doing the job. Theres an unhappy bunch of pilots to brief/debrief. but even a high-bypass turbofan is very ineffecient at low altitudes as compared to a prop. So much of the mission is down low (and we're talking low as nearly IN the spray of the ocean-low) - for HOURS I'm in the same boat here, this plane will not be doing the same low level ASW that the P-3 was able to do. "They" are going to have to redesign how to perform ASW at higher altitudes, and since that plane can't turn on a dime like the P-3 it's going to be interesting. These are the things that come up on a daily basis hat work for me. ...don't have variable pitch (at least none I have seen) That is true, the P-8's engines are just basically the biggest engines Boeing puts on a 737. In the end, a lot of changes are coming...and it's not ruthless engineering here... They're going to cube my P-3s (irony anyone?) -Sam |
Ducbsa
| Posted on Friday, August 07, 2009 - 07:07 am: |
|
I wouldn't be surprised if the intel we have didin't include the captain and part of the crew roster.... I worked with a Navy vet in the mid 70's that said he had been a Russian translator on our subs and his job was to listen to them in their subs. |
Moxnix
| Posted on Friday, August 07, 2009 - 09:07 am: |
|
Spasiba, comrade. Pushalsta .. . |
Elsinore74
| Posted on Friday, August 07, 2009 - 09:52 am: |
|
P-3s are still awesome, no matter what the PowerPoint Rangers decide to replace them with. In addition to "Blind Man's Bluff," if interested in the Cold War (and to think it's over is naive at best) another good read is "By Any Means Necessary," by William E. Burrows. Covers sensitive reconnaissance operations. Some P-3 coverage, if I recall. Been out of print for a while, but Amazon should have it. Fair Winds, and Following Seas... |
Bluzm2
| Posted on Friday, August 07, 2009 - 10:36 am: |
|
Larry, I love your nickname! Any story behind it? Just curious as I have an old 1974 Honda Elsinore MT250 in the garage! So as to not jack this thread, thanks for the additional book recomendation. I'm going to try to find a copy. Brad |
Slaughter
| Posted on Friday, August 07, 2009 - 11:04 am: |
|
I would even recommend John Craven's book The Silent War: The Cold War Battle Beneath the Sea Craven was the Navy's chief scientist running many of the special operations and directing a number of the programs that are only referred to in "Blind Man's Bluff" (not to take away from the recommendation - BOTH are a good read!) The Silent War (click - link) Well worth your time to read both. Amazing details that were only IMPLIED in Blind Man's Bluff. |
Ratyson
| Posted on Friday, August 07, 2009 - 01:02 pm: |
|
So much of the mission is down low (and we're talking low as nearly IN the spray of the ocean-low) - for HOURS That is what I loved about the job. Low enough you could smell the ocean...} |
Crusty
| Posted on Friday, August 07, 2009 - 02:54 pm: |
|
If one of those Russian subs ran aground near Gloucester, and some crewmen came ashore; would they be likely to buy Buells? Would the nearest dealership give them a Military Discount? A Uly would be a sweet way to get around in the Ukraine, don't you think? |
Cyclonedon
| Posted on Friday, August 07, 2009 - 03:15 pm: |
|
Crusty, why on earth are you talking about motorcycles on a motorcycle forum? You know better than that! Now get back to talking about politics! |
Hughlysses
| Posted on Friday, August 07, 2009 - 03:26 pm: |
|
Slaughter- thanks for the recommendation on the book. After recently visiting the USS Albacore in Portsmouth, NH, I went on a sub-reading binge and read Blind Man's Bluff, a book on NR-1, and a book by Norman Polmar comparing US and Soviet subs throughout the Cold War. I'll definitely have to find a copy of the Silent War. |
|