Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

xiziz

HMS Gotland -Vs- USS Ronald Regan Strike Group

29 posts in this topic Last Reply

Highlighted Posts

  • Original Poster
  • Posted:
    Last Online:  
     

    As the title says, The Swedish submarine HMS Gotland(of the Gotland Class) has for about 6 months been of practising with the USS Peleliu strike group and the USS Ronald Regan Strike Group.
    Or to say, HMS Gotland and her crew have been rented to the US for these exercises.

    The Gotland Class is the first in the world to use Stirling Engines, designed to operate in the Baltic.

    Anyway, to get to the point,

    Swedish Gotland Sinks american aircraft carrier.

    During one of these exersises HMS Gotland was tasked with taking photographs of the american aircraft carrier at close distance(so close that it in times of war would have meant that the carrier would have been sunken).
    Normally one would think that an American Aircrat Carrier Group, espesially one of the newer ones(like regan) to be one of the most unimpregnable places on earth.
    But HMS Gotland, got in, managed to take the pictures and leave again, UNSEEN! this in times of war would have meant that the regan would have been lying on the pacific oceanfloor right now. Luckely this was just an exercise, but it still is very facinating, That a small submarine(its only 60m) developed by a country that has been at peace for over 200 years and only has 9 million inhabitants and great defence cuts since the Iron Curtain fell, is capable of sinking an American Aircraft Carrier, unnoticed.

    Kockums(the shipyard that built the Gotland Class Submarines and the more or less fameous Visby Class Corvettes) is currently prospecting and has found interested coustumers in Asia, Persian Gulf and Soulth America, and is currently selling Sterlings(the engines) to Japan, who are fitting them to all of their new subs.

    Well the reason i posted this was if i there was/is anyone here that works for the US Navy, that might tell me more about how Gotland is faring over there. media over here dosnt make such a big thing out of it. I know we have Airforce people here, so who not navy people. Would be cool if there is anyone from the regan to tell their side of the story 3.gif

    Cheers
    //Sim

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted:
    Last Online:  
     

    People from the US Navy probably aren't allowed to comment on it.34.gif

    Although that is kind of scary, because I seem to remember that the USS Reagan was designed with technology that was specifically designed to be able to find subs like...the HMS Gotland.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted:
    Last Online:  
     

    Yeah, what VT said.

     
    What else can we expect from Sweden? Isn't interesting that a country which has remained neautral and unscathed by war in the past 120 years has the best military/industrial complex? Maybe if the US arms industry actually made decent, worthwhile technology we wouldn't have to spend billions of dollars a year on this

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted:
    Last Online: A long, long time ago... 
     

    Not to start an argument, but just because the sub saw the USS Regan doen't mean it would have sunk it, and if it had launched a torpedo, the defences aboard the Regan would have had a good chance of stoping it. If the torpedo had gotten through, and punctured the hull, I doubt one of the largest carriers in the world would have sunken, as most bulkhead doors below the water line must remain closed at all times. Plus once a torpedo is fired the US Navy would automaticlly be able to locate the sub , and once it's found they can track and destroy it.  But I can see how the sub managed to get close to the carrier group since they only US ships with advanced submarine detection measures are US subs, which are not often used in Carrier escort groups. But I don't understand how it got the pictures, because destroyer and support vesels form a protective ring around the carrier making it allmost impossible to get within firing distance of the carrier.  Especially if any of the destroyer escorts were Arligh-Burke class or were equiped with the AEGIS program, the most accurate land based tracking system. Aso you said the company who makesthe engines used in the gotland were selling them to the Japanese? I don't think that's right because Japan is not allowed to have a military able to stike outside the country according to the Post War Constitution of 1946. a submarine would definatly be breaking that.  If your interested in stuff like sub hunting games and naval war games yuo sould read Tom Clancy's The Hunt For Red October which is about a Russian nuclear sub with a revolutionary unable to detect engine trying to defect to the US during the cold war. It very good because the US is having a hard time finding the sub, just like the russian who are trying to destroy it before it is able to defect. Allthough it's a fiction book it is written with so many real facts and tactics that its rumored that tom Clancy was debriefed by the navy about how he knew about everything in the book.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted:
    Last Online:  
     

    Most intriguing. One has to assume that if Gotland had fired on Regan that it would have had to be a nuclear warhead to sink the carrier. Previous notes about watertight doors are correct, and means that a lot of destruction would have to take place.

    I doubt Gotland would have gotten in more than one shot, and would have been destroyed by the ensuing explosion if it were close enough to get a hit.

    Fancy technology is all very well, but I'll bet heads were rolling in the CIC on board the carrier. Is is possible that they don't have passive sonar arrays? What about the escorts? I don't think much of the defensive screen.

    For those who don't know, a Stirling Engine is nothing special. They were invented early in the twentieth century and were really for automotive use. The Detroit bumch suppressed them. I am glad to see this technology surfacing now because it is better than the power plants traditionally used in the automotive industry.


    Beware: Emancipated user.  No Windoze for me.
    The teacher opens the door but the student must enter himself. - Ancient Chinese Saying

    Every minute of hate in which one indulges oneself is sixty seconds of happiness lost.
    Music expresses that which cannot be put into words and that which cannot remain silent. -- Victor Hugo
    If you always do what you've always done, you'll mostly get what you've always got.
    JohnNewSig.gif
    "We have met the enemy, and he is us" - Walt Kelly

    Come join us at the Moose Factory

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
  • Original Poster
  • Posted:
    Last Online:  
     

    VT: Yeah, guess your right about that on a second thought :/
    ancientsociety: Yeah, i just found it very interesting that a swedish(of all the countries with submarines) has the capability for this.

    Dupontfan24:

    As for Tom Clancy, I love his books, my favorite is however Red Storm Rising, though ive both red and watched Red October. Clancy is by far my favorite Autour.

    Play with the idea a bit, sure a normal torpedo wouldnt sink the Regan, or shouldnt anyway, though a Torpedo strike or say 4 in the stern of the ship would probably wreak havoc to the machinery. Powerful torpedos would most likley knock a very big hole, or play a bit more and have it be a tactical nuke.
    The main purpose of having escorts like the carrier groups have is to prevent anything coming within range of the carrier. The aft of ships are from what i know anyway not the most heavly armoured part of a ship.

    Anyway, if she would have sunk depends on what weponry is used, and how the stern of a Nimitz class carrier is built(as far as i know no one has ever shot a torpedo at the stern of one).

    As for the carrier group, the newest nimitz class in the Us Navy, it consists of:
    The Ronald Reagan Strike Group is comprised of CVW-14, DESRON 7, the nuclear-powered aircraft carrier Reagan, the guided-missile cruiser USS Lake Champlain (CG 57), the guided-missile destroyers USS McCampbell (DDG 85) and USS Decatur (DDG 73), the fast combat support ship USNS Rainier (T-AOE 7), the fast-attack submarine USS Tucson (SSN 770), and Explosive Ordnance Disposal Unit 11, Det. 15.
    -http://www.navy.mil/search/display.asp?story_id=21444

    The thing you also forget is that this submarine has a revolutionary engine system(Though propelled by screw, its about as revolutionary as the CATEPILLAR drive in Red October). It is designed to be hard to detect, the scope probably is deflective, so it deflects radarwaves(like the F117) making somthing as small as a scope practicly invissible.

    Actually Japan has a military force, Self Defence forces, they have 3 classes of submarines in service, a full listing of the Japanese Navy is here .
    They are currently building one more submarine every year, and these are beeing equipped with Sterlings.

    Sweden is refitting our old submarines with Sterlings. I belive they are cheaper to maintain than the old disels to, and that is good for the swedish navy that has been affacted by davastating cuts the last few years.

    Cheers
    //Sim

    Edit:
    N_O_Body, you managed to post while i was writing the above.
    Well, a powerful enough torpedo at the right place might trigger an overload to the reactor causing a meltdown(Thoughts carried away), that would eventually sink the ship. Put it this way anyway, the screws in the carrier would have blasted with a big chunk of the aft hull, explosives are extremly powerful these days, and exploding them underwater causes them to become even more powerful(Because of the pressure). And they would be able to get atleast 4 torpedos away, since theve got 4 tubes.

    I didnt know that about the sterling, but even if its old, it seems to be very effective at propelling small submarines.

    Cheers
    //Sim

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted:
    Last Online: A long, long time ago... 
     

    Holy crap, this thread hasn't been filled with a bunch of stupid posts by uninformed people saying things like naahuha, my county is better, they got this and they got that blah blah blah47.gif  edited. Mr. C.

    N_O_Body: good point a standard topedo warhead would not have done much at all to the ship. most suface ships don't have sonar unless they are subhunters, so no, the carrier doesn't have it.  I've never heard of these stirling engines, could you tell me about them and what makes them so good?

     
    xizizTom clacy is also my favorite author, i haven't read red storm rising yet though, right now I'm reading Without remorse. Also I didn't really like the red October movies, it didn't really follow the story line too much. well only one conventional torpedo could have severly crippled the ship, since only one would be needed to take out one of the proplers, but the ship could still move because 2 proplers and 1 rudder on one one side of the ship and  the same on the other side, so a one sided attack could not stop the ships propulsion. also ships ar only armored from the waterline up or in some cases form the top deck up, thats why the USS cole suffered as much damage as it did, since there was allmost no protection where the impact happened. You also forgot the most important part of the carrier strike group, the carrier air wing of over 80 aircraft and 1500 personel. and, radar waves are not used to detect submarines because radar waves are to large to travel under water, that why sonar is used, which is based off sounds rather than size and shape. I knew about the Japanse JSDF, it's similar to the USA's National Gurad, but they are arn't allowed to have a military capable of carrying out offensive operations, and in my opinion a submarine would be able to do just that. And I'm sure anything is better than a deisel for a sub, since they are very loud, making them easilly suceptable to sonar location.  I know alot about this military stuff because both of my Grandfathers were in the US Navy. One was on the USS Forestal CVN 59 aircraft carrier and worked at a Naval shipbuilding yard for 30 years. My other grandfather was a US Navy Seabee, who made landing stips in the south pacific islands in WWII. I also get allot of info from reading and wtchinf TV shows
     
     
     
     

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted:
    Last Online:  
     

    Sneeking close enough to take a picture is one thing. Actually being able to sink it is a completely different task and one probably not easily accomplished. Even if a torpedo was able to hit the Regan (something I kind of doubt) it would take an EXTREMELY powerful explosion to sink a carrier.


    We only need enjoy one day at a time.

    <br>

    Formerly known as hummer0328

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted:
    Last Online:  
     

    I was wrong about something I posted up above.  The USS Reagan may or may not have the technology to be able to find subs like the HMS Gotland, however, a new class of attack submarines do come with the technology to detect the Sterling engine, and so far have had pretty good success.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted:
    Last Online:  
     

    Date: 1/20/2006 4:05:46 PM Author: N_O_Body Most intriguing.&nbsp; One has to assume that if Gotland had fired on Regan that it would have had to be a nuclear warhead to sink the carrier.&nbsp; Previous notes about watertight doors are correct, and means that a lot of destruction would have to take place.&nbsp; I doubt Gotland would have gotten in more than one shot, and would have been destroyed by the ensuing explosion if it were close enough to get a hit. Fancy technology is all very well, but I'll bet heads were rolling in the CIC on board the carrier.&nbsp; Is is possible that they don't have passive sonar arrays?&nbsp; What about the escorts?&nbsp; I don't think much of the defensive screen. For those who don't know, a Stirling Engine is nothing special.&nbsp; They were invented early in the twentieth century and were really for automotive use.&nbsp; The Detroit bumch suppressed them.&nbsp; I am glad to see this technology surfacing now because it is better than the power plants traditionally used in the automotive industry.
    quote>
    A sub the size of the Gottland (60 meters) is difficult to detect because of its small size (refraction of the sonar waves is the problem).  As for the escorts, (unless I'm remembering incorrectly) a US Navy captain (who commanded an aircraft carrier) said that a typical carrier escort is 4 destroyers, 4 battleships, 4 cruisers, 4 AEGIS cruisers, and 2 subs.  Most of the new carriers (from the USS Enterprise and later) have torpedoes so that they can fire on enemy subs if necessary.
     
    I doubt that they would have used a nuclear torpedo as it would probably kill everyone in the general area.  I've also heard that the reactor cores are designed so that a normal high explosive blast won't send the reactors into meltdown.

    General Rules|Chat Rules

    "Adherence to one's principles should not prevent satisfaction of those same principles."

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted:
    Last Online:  
     
    All right, I'm going to keep this as short as posible.(I got a hot date in an hour29.gif)  First of all, I hate all these opinions of who's better bla bla bla and what u rember about the navy movies or what u think because someone in you're family was in the navy(no offence to anyone).  Tom Clancy is full of crap, was never in the service, and a fact that most people don't know is that sailors are the biggest BSers in the world.  I was in the (modern) navy for eight years, I've seen the world, seen friends die, killed towel heads, and most importantly taken part in hundreds of hours in war games with several different countries.
     
    If anyone has  a question pertaining to the above PM me.
     
    Now then, It is impossible to get past destroyer/cruiser/frigate escort in any staged game because they are already looking for you and as soon a active pinging starts, by only one ship (anti subsuface tactics), no matter how quiet you are you will be detected.  Even large fish show up on other ships passive after a ping! 
     
    Carriers do not have any sub suface tracking or any other anti sub ability.
    Carriers are incapable of firing torpedoes.
    The last battle ship in the US arsenal decomisioned in '91.
    All ships in the world do not have armored hulls anymore.
    Submarines that have diesel engines on board do not run their engines under water dumbass, where does the exhaust go?
    They run on battery power sub suface, that is why they are harder to detect than nuclear subs.
    That is also why the Japanese are able to have them, deisel subs have a very short range and are only economical for defence.
     
    These are the facts.
     
    And finaly, I was on the first responding ship to the Cole bombing.  That ship had no armour,  Its crew were very inexperianced,  and in a at port situation like that most water tight doors are open.  If they would have been closed the flooding would have not been so bad.  But in the end, it was a cheap destroyer and consitered expendible by the goverment.
     
    ps, that pictue from the sub was probably taken durring a scenario that the sub was in a win win situation.  when they do war games, they do more than one to examine every posible outcome. 
     
    some edits due to content. Mr. C.
     

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted:
    Last Online:  
     

    I mentioned a nuc because that is the only way I could think of to sink such a big ship with a single torp volley.  Of course it would be a Kamikaze mission for the sub.  If they were not killed by the immediate blast, the pressure waves, etc. would surely damage her and send her to the bottom.

    I haven't given any thought to it, but I have always believed that armor on a ship these days is about as useful as mammary glands on a male pig.  Long range artillry battles are not fought at sea any more.  I don't think there have been any since WW II.  The original expense, and ongoing expense for lugging armour about would affect the manoeverability of ships.  Fast and furious is better than slow and heavy, eh?

    Beware: Emancipated user.  No Windoze for me.
    The teacher opens the door but the student must enter himself. - Ancient Chinese Saying

    Every minute of hate in which one indulges oneself is sixty seconds of happiness lost.
    Music expresses that which cannot be put into words and that which cannot remain silent. -- Victor Hugo
    If you always do what you've always done, you'll mostly get what you've always got.
    JohnNewSig.gif
    "We have met the enemy, and he is us" - Walt Kelly

    Come join us at the Moose Factory

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted:
    Last Online:  
     

    Interesting read guys.  As a 14-year military veteran (medically discharged) I'm immediately drawn to any discussion of the military.  I especially like the posts by those of you with actual experience and/or extensive knowledge through reading and research.  No offense to the others but sometimes it's best to keep your opinions to yourself if that's all you have to offer.  And just because you saw it on TV doesn't make it so. 10.gif

    I do have a question for xiziz and that is where did you hear about this?  Military exercises are usually top secret and no one, I repeat, no one is allowed to discuss what happened.  A quick trip through a couple of U.S. Navy websites failed to find any reference to military exercises involving the Ronald Regan. 

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted:
    Last Online:  
     

    Date: 1/21/2006 6:57:10 PM Author: N_O_Body @wagusmaximus:&nbsp; First of all, that was a little strong for this board.&nbsp; Try not to lose your temper like that. I mentioned a nuc because that is the only way I could think of to sink such a big ship with a single torp volley.&nbsp; Of course it would be a Kamikaze mission for the sub.&nbsp; If they were not killed by the immediate blast, the pressure waves, etc. would surely damage her and send her to the bottom. I haven't given any thought to it, but I have always believed that armor on a ship these days is about as useful as mammary glands on a male pig.&nbsp; Long range artillry battles are not fought at sea any more.&nbsp; I don't think there have been any since WW II.&nbsp; The original expense, and ongoing expense for lugging armour about would affect the manoeverability of ships.&nbsp; Fast and furious is better than slow and heavy, eh?
    quote>

    I couldn't agree with that more.  Now, as SamFlash pointed out, what I am about to tell you is something that I saw on TV, so take it with a grain of salt.  Anyway, supposedly, the US military figured out how to sink a ship with a single torpedo.  The answer is to detonate the torpedo underneath the keel of the vessel instead of actually hitting it.  That is supposed to break the ship into two pieces (which does actually make sense given how destructive water can be if it is properly energized).  Anyway, you break the ship into two pieces, and it will go down in minutes, blast doors sealed or not.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted:
    Last Online:  
     
    Date: 1/21/2006 10:49:51 PM Author: Voar Tok

    I couldn't agree with that more.&nbsp; Now, as SamFlash pointed out, what I am about to tell you is something that I saw on TV, so take it with a grain of salt.&nbsp; Anyway, supposedly, the US military figured out how to sink a ship with a single torpedo.&nbsp; The answer is to detonate the torpedo underneath the keel of the vessel instead of actually hitting it.&nbsp; That is supposed to break the ship into two pieces (which does actually make sense given how destructive water can be if it is properly energized).&nbsp; Anyway, you break the ship into two pieces, and it will go down in minutes, blast doors sealed or not.

    quote>

    There might be some truth to that as an old navy submarineer (sp?) talked about that at my December VFW meeting.  What he couldn't answer was my question about how does the tropedo know when it's directly under the keel?  It's hard enough to hit a ship and now we're talking about one particular spot on a ship.  I'm curious how that is done.  Voar Tok, did your TV show enlighten you about how they do that? 10.gif

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted:
    Last Online:  
     
    Date: 1/21/2006 3:53:05 PM Author: wagusmaximus
    Now then, It is impossible to get past destroyer/cruiser/frigate escort in any staged game because they are already looking for you and as soon a active pinging starts, by only one ship (anti subsuface tactics), no matter how quiet you are you will be detected.&nbsp; Even large fish show up on other ships passive after a ping!&nbsp;
    Carriers do not have any sub suface tracking or any other anti sub ability.
    Carriers are incapable of firing torpedoes.
    The last battle ship in the US arsenal decomisioned in '91.
    All ships in the world do not have armored hulls anymore.
    Submarines that have diesel engines on board do not run their engines under water dumbass, where does the exhaust go?
    They run on battery power sub suface, that is why they are harder to detect than nuclear subs.
    That is also why the Japanese are able to have them, deisel subs have a very short range and are only economical for defence.
    These are the facts.

    quote>
    Well, I've been on a tour of the USS Enterprise (would have gotten a tour of a submarine, but my grandfather didn't know anyone currently serving in the Navy) and the lieutenant who gave us the tour said that the Enterprise could fire two torpedoes if absolutely necessary, although it wasn't really equipped for it.
     
    As for the info about the carrier escorts, I got the info off of a TV program (I know that's not a 100% reliable medium for information) and the captain interviewed mentioned what a typical carrier escort consisted of.  Given that you said that the last battleship was decommissioned in 1991, I guess I'm remembering the information wrong.

    General Rules|Chat Rules

    "Adherence to one's principles should not prevent satisfaction of those same principles."

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted:
    Last Online:  
     

    During WWII, some of the planes on a carrier could drop torpedoes to take out enemy ships.  Does anyone know if any of the current crop of carrier-based aircraft have the same capability?  10.gif

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted:
    Last Online: A long, long time ago... 
     

    I was just stating facts that I had about this subject, not saying who is better and this and that, also you have no idea where i got my facts, so you can't say weather or not they are correct.  My Grandfather was a forman at the Philadelphia Naval yard for 30, so how can you say he doesn't know what he was talking about. another thing, I know ALOT about the US military, I've read The Complete History of the US Navy cover to cover and have toured both a battleships and a submarine. So don't just assume that someone who hasn't been in the military knows nothing about it, because you know what assuming does2.gif

    I'm gonna guess you've never read more than a sentence of on of Tom Clancy's book. he's written, SSN:stragies of submarine warfare, Submarine: a guided tour, and carrier a guided tour. In all of these books mentioned he was abourd during training exercises and war games, so I HIGHLY doubt he's full of crap.
    And if as you claim saliors are the biggest bs'rs in the world how do we all know your not BS-ing us now? 
    Diesels can be run underwater, the exhaust just needs to be vented out of the hull, causeing more noise.
     
    about the comment you made about the cole here is exactly what i said
    also ships ar only armored from the waterline up or in some cases form the top deck up, thats why the USS cole suffered as much damage as it did, since there was allmost no protection where the impact happened.  I said nothing about those onboard the ship or about their experience, all I said was if the ship had been armored,  less men or none at all would have died.
     
     
    This thread was only a casual discussion about the topic and and ways it could or couldn't have happend etc.
     
    some edits made due to content - please discuss the topic at hand, not each other. Thank you. Mr. C.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted:
    Last Online:  
     
    Date: 1/21/2006 11:40:47 PM Author: SamFlash
    Date: 1/21/2006 10:49:51 PM Author: Voar Tok

    I couldn't agree with that more.&amp;nbsp; Now, as SamFlash pointed out, what I am about to tell you is something that I saw on TV, so take it with a grain of salt.&amp;nbsp; Anyway, supposedly, the US military figured out how to sink a ship with a single torpedo.&amp;nbsp; The answer is to detonate the torpedo underneath the keel of the vessel instead of actually hitting it.&amp;nbsp; That is supposed to break the ship into two pieces (which does actually make sense given how destructive water can be if it is properly energized).&amp;nbsp; Anyway, you break the ship into two pieces, and it will go down in minutes, blast doors sealed or not.

    quote>

    There might be some truth to that as an old navy submarineer (sp?) talked about that at my December VFW meeting.&nbsp; What he couldn't answer was my question about how does the tropedo know when it's directly under the keel?&nbsp; It's hard enough to hit a ship and now we're talking about one particular spot on a ship.&nbsp; I'm curious how that is done.&nbsp; Voar Tok, did your TV show enlighten you about how they do that? 10.gif

    quote>

    I'm guessing a combination of smart computer software and sonar.  Currently, once the onboard computer locks onto your ship, it doesn't have any trouble following you around.  So theoretically, it shouldn't be too terribly harder to teach it how to know when it is under the keel.  However, the program didn't say anything about how it worked, just that it did work, and they showed some naval ship sinking in record time (to say that it went down like a stone would be an understatement).

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
  • Original Poster
  • Posted:
    Last Online:  
     
    Date: 1/22/2006 1:34:01 PM
    Author: SamFlash
    During WWII, some of the planes on a carrier could drop torpedoes to take out enemy ships. Does anyone know if any of the current crop of carrier-based aircraft have the same capability? 10.gif
    quote>

    I belive all US-Carriers carry 4 Seahawk Helicopters for ASW. I heard it somewhere anyway.

    Cheers
    //sim

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted:
    Last Online:  
     

    Wow! enjoyed the lecture.  I guess I got your juices flowing!  Didn't mean to piss anyone off, just take the discussion to the next level, looks like it worked.
     
    See I'm a big joker, so you gotta take what I say w/ a grain of salt.  Unless I say these are the facts which I did above.  But seriously, building a ship and sailing a ship are two totally diferent things.  For example, what ships did he build, does he know the caps and lims?  has he ever been on a sea trial?  Does he have Warfare pins? I have all three ware pins that took me three years to earn and I now every inch of every ship currently in service and everyone's job and what watch they stand.  cause I've stood them all.  And I will never keep my mouth shut as long as freedom rings
    I had a secret clearance and most of the stuff I've seen and read would blow you're mind.  I can't even mention them without being hanged for treason.  Like anything you've seen on cnn about North Korea,  I was there 2 days before.  (getting recalled on a good weekend in tokyo really pisses u off)
     
    And I'm sorry for pissing u off again, but I have too. I'll say it again tom is full of crap.  the navy only lets him see what they want him to see so he can write his next Fiction best seller.  Yes I have read alot of his books, some were required reading, and found them very entertaining.  But the biggest laugh I get is these guided tours.  They leave out a whole bunch of stuff, because they are selling books.  Can't publish classified stuff and won't put the uncool stuff in because the reader would loose intrest.  That history of the navy thing, just a drop in the bucket.  It doesn't tell u about the time u have to accompany your dead friends body to his parents and tell them how he lived and died.8.gif
     
    Now, before this turns into a big contest, I respect everone here.  As I was a goverment employee, I was working for u so we could have these postings in freedom.  But the best advice I can give you is get off you're duff and join the NAVY.  It is a rather eye opening experience.
     
    And now for everyone else,  Carriers cannot fire torps literly. They have sh60 helocopters modified for ASW (Anti Sub-surface Warfare) and can drop guided torps that use a system called link 11 to locate subs via cruisers and destroyers.  The CGs and DDg form a kind of circle around a carrier that extends radar and sonar  and in linked together through link 11, 24, and 16  so the command ship can see the big picture and make dicisions.  The carrier has no sub suface abilities on its own and relies on teamwork.  The carrier is the most importand element though, but its main mission is its strike capabillites, not defence.
    these are the facts
     
    How was that samflash, pretty close?

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted:
    Last Online:  
     

    @wagusmaximus: Well, your screen name translates as biggest wagger (as in dog's tail) and I think your stuff is exactly that, a tale.

    I had a secret clearance
    quote>How would you know? People who are cleared don't know their level unless the security officer screws up. You see, I once applied for TS/SA and since I was allowed to go to some meetings, I guess I got it. You never know how high you have been cleared until you try to go somewhere you are not permitted. And even then you only know that that place is above your level.

    Beware: Emancipated user.  No Windoze for me.
    The teacher opens the door but the student must enter himself. - Ancient Chinese Saying

    Every minute of hate in which one indulges oneself is sixty seconds of happiness lost.
    Music expresses that which cannot be put into words and that which cannot remain silent. -- Victor Hugo
    If you always do what you've always done, you'll mostly get what you've always got.
    JohnNewSig.gif
    "We have met the enemy, and he is us" - Walt Kelly

    Come join us at the Moose Factory

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted:
    Last Online:  
     
    Excellent!  Someone who knows what I'm talking about.  I was trying to dim it down for people who don't know.  (lammens terms)  Mainly what I was talking about message traffic, all sorts of goodies there.
     

    N_O_Body:

    Things have changed alot since u were in old timer.2.gif

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted:
    Last Online:  
     

    Date: 1/23/2006 4:22:31 PM Author: N_O_Body @wagusmaximus:&nbsp; Well, your screen name translates as biggest wagger (as in dog's tail) and I think your stuff is exactly that, a tale.&nbsp;
    I had a secret clearance
    quote>How would you know?&nbsp; People who are cleared don't know their level unless the security officer screws up.&nbsp; You see, I once applied for TS/SA and since I was allowed to go to some meetings, I guess I got it.&nbsp; You never know how high you have been cleared until you try to go somewhere you are not permitted.&nbsp; And even then you only know that that place is above your level.
    quote>
    I believe your a Canadian so mabe it's different up there.   If your in the U.S. Military you know the level of clearance you've got.  It's on the forms you fill out to get the clearance to begin with, it's in your personal record file (which you can see anytime you want) and it's on your discharge papers when you get out.  Also, everyone you work with knows.  If you in the navy and stationed on any of the newer ships, at least a quarter or more of the crew have a secret clearance of one type or another. 
     
    wagusmaximus - you did well.  I only asked the question to see if anyone was paying attention. You and Xiziz were. 

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted:
    Last Online: A long, long time ago... 
     

    wagusmaximus: Before he worked in the shipyard, he was a flightdeck worker on the CVN USS Forestall (i'm not sure what he did, I don't know the shirt color either, but know he worked on the flight deck) as for pins I've never seen his, but have seen my other grandfathers pins I only remember the WWII service ribon, but I know he had 12 of them.

    I now every inch of every ship currently in service and everyone's job and what watch they stand.  cause I've stood them all.

    I doubt that. also you have said the Tom Clancy is full of crap but now your saying he writes about stuff the military tells him, so is the military full of crap too, I don't think so. and he doesn't just include the cool stuff too, I read Fighter Wing a Guided Tour and some chapter bored the crap outta me, they were all just specs for planes I allready knew about.
     
    I don't want to ruin this thread with arguments, So I think we should just keep our comments to our selves.19.gif

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    Posted:
    Last Online:  
     

    Okay, my post was eaten last night by the mysterious web monster. So I'll try to remember my train of thought.

    I wanted to comment on this for a few reasons. First to Dupont... my ship was right next to the USS Forrestal in drydock in the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard back in the early '80's. I was fresh out of school and at that time it was the oldest carrier (and smallest) in the fleet. It was still pretty impressive to a kid.
     
    Second, to Wager... since you mentioned the Link systems, I actually worked on those along with other radar and communication systems. The Navy's technical abilities have expanded quite a bit since they were state of the art. Battle Groups (BGs) these days maintain virtual links that allow the TAO in CDC/CIC to see what other ships in that group see through their sensors and control their systems if they so choose. They could even link to a ship halfway around the world.
     
    It's not that unusual for an incident like that to happen. It's really no big deal. While it is possible for a sub to close in to another ship and then go undetected using natural (ie: thermal layers) and artificial (EW) phenomena, it wouldn't be the smartest or safest thing to do during peacetime conditions. With the technology and training at the Navy's disposal, it's highly unlikely it happened without their acknowledgement. Another thing to keep in mind, is that ALL BGs have two subs of their own in close proximity at all times. That, along with the screens provided by the destroyers and frigates in the group make it quite daunting a task to get close to that carrier without their prior knowledge.
     
    In my time, I maintained a NATO/TS clearance. You do know what level you're at because your job requires it.
     
    If you feel that all sailors are full of BS, feel free to poke away at my soliloquy. I spent a great deal of time installing the systems the Navy now has onboard most of it's ships and training sailors to use them. They are highly sought after once they leave the service ( moreso, in some instances, than kids straight out of college) and most are extremely competent and tech savvy.
     
    As far as Tom Clancy is concerned, he has always taken information he learned through reading manuals, talking to various experts and extrapolated to come up with scenarios that are close to being right on point. He actually hit close to home in Red Storm Rising when the ship I was on at the time was sunk in his book. That sucked. I like his books... the tech in Crimson Tide reminds me of a few people I knew.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    • Recently Browsing   0 members

      No registered users viewing this page.

    ×

    Thank You for the Continued Support!

    Simtropolis relies mainly on member donations to continue operating. Without your support, we just would not be able to be entering our 20th year online!  You really help make this a great community.

    But we still need your support to stay online. If you're able to, please consider a donation to help us stay up and running, so that we can help keep bringing SimCity players together to share our creations.

    Make a Donation, Get a Gift!

    Expand your city with the best from the Simtropolis Exchange.
    Make a Donation and get one or all three discs today!

    STEX Collections

    By way of a "Thank You" gift, we'd like to send you our STEX Collector's DVD. It's some of the best buildings, lots, maps and mods collected for you over the years. Check out the STEX Collections for more info.

    Each donation helps keep Simtropolis online, open and free!

    Thank you for reading and enjoy the site!

    More About STEX Collections