How many kills would a Kilo be expected to make?

[Kurushio]

...before it'd be destroyed? I'm not talking about the Russian's Kilo. The ones in Iranian and Chinese hands. And the theoretical opponent is the US Navy, obviously. So....how many? 1 kill for 1 Kilo or would the Kilo be expected to take out a whole flotilla before giving the game up?

[Bill Nichols]

I'll give the Kilo one attack, then all h*** will break out.

[Kurushio]

Thanks for the quick reply Bill. So would that be considered a success or failure for the Kilo...cost effective wise? At what point would a Kilo be considered a "good investment"? If it took out a FFG then got destroyed...is that good for the Kilo?

[Oberon]

Depends on the scenario, a clever captain could position his boat in a way to avoid detection and then fire a slow running torpedo and clear the datum at best speed. It's harder to do in a diesel than in a nuc I'd say but probably still possible.
However, if this is in open water, then the Kilo's dead anyway, they're primarily coastal boats, they can hide in the shallows, come out...fire...then hide again, the sonar condictions in the shallows are a little bit tougher than open water I think, so it'd be slightly easier to hide, plus you could use natural landmarks like coves and inlets, places where a nuclear boat can't go.

[TLAM Strike]

Depends on whose commanding it. If I’m commanding trust me there going to be blood!
TLAM Strike: Mercenary Submarine Captain

But seriously a Kilo cost what 47,000,000 USD? While a FFG-7 costs only 16,000,000 USD. So nailing one FFG would not “pay for” the Kilo.

[compressioncut]

Iran's Kilos aren't really expected to kill anything. Just the fact that they were out, or rumored to be out, in a threatening posture would seal the Strait of Hormuz and strangle a huge amount of oil traffic out of the Persian/Arabian Gulf. That's their job.

Chinese Kilos would probably do something similar to the Malacca Strait, Spratly Islands, etc.

[GunnersMate]

If the Iranians can get their Kilo's out of port that is a positive for them! :-j :lol:

[Bill Nichols]

If the Iranians can get their Kilo's out of port that is a positive for them! :-j :lol:


Better give Iran a positive, then:

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/060411/photos_wl_me_afp/a0d56651ae0c54c3e1c80b33b1d78ceb

[TLAM Strike]

Is it just me or is there a big ass dent just under her forward planes?

[JSLTIGER]

And here I was about to say that she looked like she was in pretty decent shape...looks like its just some rust though...maybe they've fallen into a little disrepair.

Iranian XO to CO:
"Captain, we're at 15 meters, passing crush depth!"

[Henson]

The Iranians?

Zero.

We know when their XO farts in his sleep.

[Yskonyn]

Lol! :)
But nice that the thread started off with the assumption that the Kilo would be killed no matter what. :)
:know:

[SeaQueen]

...before it'd be destroyed? I'm not talking about the Russian's Kilo. The ones in Iranian and Chinese hands. And the theoretical opponent is the US Navy, obviously. So....how many? 1 kill for 1 Kilo or would the Kilo be expected to take out a whole flotilla before giving the game up?

All by itself, I'm with Bill. I give the Kilo one salvo before they throw the kitchen sink at 'em. Then he might still luck out, but it'd be luck, not anything special about the Kilo.

[Camie Jarlson]

These Kilos are the only thing in Iran's arsenal that make me sweat. But I don't think they're nothing the USN couldn't handle. :ping:

[SeaQueen]

Thanks for the quick reply Bill. So would that be considered a success or failure for the Kilo...cost effective wise? At what point would a Kilo be considered a "good investment"? If it took out a FFG then got destroyed...is that good for the Kilo?

In general, you always want to target the biggest, most expensive units, which have the biggest impact on the outcome of the war.

Taking out an FFG wouldn't be the ideal thing to do if all you had was a kilo. That'd be the kilo losing the battle.

If you were smart, you'd sit and wait, then go for a CVN or an LHA/D. If you sank one of those, it's be like another 9/11. Imagine 3-5000 Marines and sailors dead in one day. Failing that, the next best thing to go for would be logistics ships and small gators. If a kilo sank any of those, the kilo commander would probably be very happy.

This kind of marginal utility question really depends a lot on the tactics one might expect any of these nations might use. You'd probably best ask a Chinese or Iranian analyst for their thoughts on it.

[Orm]

Beware, History has proven more than once that they are the ones that underestimate others that will get kick in their a...

[Kapitan]

in the old days of cold war submarines were seen as Expendable now days its not so, the more ships the better kilo should realy kill at least 6 to make a diffrence , after all there was 24 built only 11 remain.

The kilo nowdays is quite limited in what it can do, the russian ones cant go very deep or fast (same as all) and they are now getting fairly old so today id say one shot one kill where as if it was akula it be at least 20.

[Bill Nichols]

in the old days of cold war submarines were seen as Expendable ....

:o Maybe in the USSR...

[Kapitan]

The were bill why do you think they launched over 250 whiskeys? not because they had some spear cash it was simply because they knew that they couldnt comete with the west's tech so to get round it they built up in numbers.

The could affored to "loose a few"

[TLAM Strike]

in the old days of cold war submarines were seen as Expendable ....

:o Maybe in the USSR...

Note the look on Bill's face. Thats the "Their telling me this now" look. :D

The could affored to "loose a few"
... dozen... :lol:

[Kapitan]

Few dozen my my TLAM you are generous personaly id have said almost the lot !

[Linton]

I am sure that any Iranian Kilo sent into combat will be on a one way mission.They will all be wearing twelve pairs of underpants and expecting the truckload of virgins to be waiting for them in the afterlife.An adcap will be their bus ticket.

[Takeda Shingen]

I would not question the Kilo class. It remains a capable, if not particularly state-of-the-art threat. What I would question are the Iranian crews and tactics of attack. In the hands of the Russians or Chinese, I would be concerned. In the hands of the Iranians, I am not so worried.

[Skybird]

Thanks for the quick reply Bill. So would that be considered a success or failure for the Kilo...cost effective wise? At what point would a Kilo be considered a "good investment"? If it took out a FFG then got destroyed...is that good for the Kilo?

Your answer may depend on whether you are part of it's crew onboard, or not.

[LuftWolf]

I would not question the Kilo class. It remains a capable, if not particularly state-of-the-art threat. What I would question are the Iranian crews and tactics of attack. In the hands of the Russians or Chinese, I would be concerned. In the hands of the Iranians, I am not so worried.

Before the revolution, the Iranian sub crews trained here in the states in the same places our sub crews trained. :roll: :-?

[Takeda Shingen]

Before the revolution, the Iranian sub crews trained here in the states in the same places our sub crews trained. :roll: :-?

Oh, so they recieved the same training. Then we are doomed. All of us. All.

Or, more likely, they leared how to dive and surface their boat, how to achieve neutral bouyancy, etc. I am fairly confident that the finer points of submarine warfare were not discussed with them. Besides that training is near 30 years old. Naval warfare has changed a lot since then. :roll: :-?

[Kapitan]

Tak has a point, we have trained other crews here in the UK i know of some indians that have trained here but they are not taught what we are taught, we can safely say iran has no proper training for her crew.

[LuftWolf]

My point was more about geo-politics. :-j :P

[Wildcat]

if they can figure out nuclear physics as they claim to have done, and are able to operate supercavitation torpedoes as they claim to have done, I'm damned sure they can figure out how to operate sonar in littoral water environments off their own coasts.

To echo someone elses statements in here, do not underestimate anyone. Underestimation is the prime ingredient needed to receive a big arse whooping.

[Deamon]

The were bill why do you think they launched over 250 whiskeys?

Aren't half of the russians subs just spare parts storage ?

Deamon

[goldorak]

I'll give the Kilo one attack, then all h*** will break out.


I think it depends, if history repeats itself then diesel submarines can break havoc to stationary fleets ( cfr the falkland war).
In open sea I don't see the kilo being a threat against us naval forces, but the equation changes dramatically in littoral waters.

[Deamon]

I'll give the Kilo one attack, then all h*** will break out.


I think it depends, if history repeats itself then diesel submarines can break havoc to stationary fleets ( cfr the falkland war).
In open sea I don't see the kilo being a threat against us naval forces, but the equation changes dramatically in littoral waters.

Why do you think it isn't a threat in open sea ?

[Kapitan]

If you cant see the threat it poses to US forces then my god you are nuts.

A kilo in the gulf is more than your worst nightmare, its the nightmare thatr comes true, limited monovering shallow waters reduced speed's perfect for the kilo just to sit there and launch.

[Kapitan]

Double post

[goldorak]

Why do you think it isn't a threat in open sea ?


Because of mobility ?
Moreover consider that nuclear submarines acting asw are not constrained by low depth, not optimal sonar conditions etc....
so in open sea us naval forces have an advantage.

Not so in littoral waters, or if the fleet is stationary.

Just look how easily american warships were attacked while in port.

[Deamon]

Because of mobility ?

What's wrong with it ?

Moreover consider that nuclear submarines acting asw are not constrained by low depth, not optimal sonar conditions etc....
so in open sea us naval forces have an advantage.

Not so in littoral waters, or if the fleet is stationary.

Just look how easily american warships were attacked while in port.

Well, advantage is a relative term. That all depends on the situation. The kilo is quit, it can move, it has sensors and it has weapons!!! So it's a threat!!!

Don't come across it's way.

Deamon

[goldorak]

Please Deamon you don't see Kilo's waging war or conducting operations in the middle of the atlantic or pacific oceans now do you ? :roll:
Kilo is designed to operate near the coast not in the middle of an ocean and it is deadly in that environment.
I never said the kilo wasn't deadly, it is deadly in littoral waters.
Take it to the middle of the ocean and it would have a very hard time going against a surface fleet + asw screening.
Why ? Becase of limited speed, the need to resurface to charge batteries, the limited range, the limited maneuvrability options etc....
All elements that american nuclear submarines don't have.

Now in littoral waters, low depth, poor sonar conditions, enourmous nuclear submarines have low maneuvrability, slow speed (you don't want to cavitate do you ? ) so in this case diesel submarines have the advantage.

[Kurushio]

I feel like a sardine at a tuna convention posting here :doh: ...so would it be reasonable to assume Iran's Kilos would be used in hit and run tactics in the Straits of Homuz instead of full out naval war against American fleets?

On that thought...wouldn't it just be easier bombing the heck out of Iranian submarine bases, then actually going after the sub itself?

[goldorak]

I feel like a sardine at a tuna convention posting here :doh: ...so would it be reasonable to assume Iran's Kilos would be used in hit and run tactics in the Straits of Homuz instead of full out naval war against American fleets?



Yeah, Kilo's could make the civilian and military navigation in the strait of ormuz a real nightmare.



On that thought...wouldn't it just be easier bombing the heck out of Iranian submarine bases, then actually going after the sub itself?



You want to start another war with Iran after Iraq ?
Even if I don't agree with Iran's viewpoint on trying to acquire military grade nuclear technology I see nonetheless a basic fact about nukes.
Countries that have nukes (in one form or another) are not attacked by us forces.
Why do you think that North Korea has never been attacked by us forces ?
North Korea poses a much more relevant threat to United States security than Iraq ever did.
And here we are seeing that the us uses preventive strikes only against non nuclear countries.
Something to think about.

[Deamon]

Please Deamon you don't see Kilo's waging war or conducting operations in the middle of the atlantic or pacific oceans now do you ? :roll:

I see them waging war in Hell :88)

You learn something from history do ya ?

They will wage war wherever the admiral will send them to. I remember during the cold war, as a bold Foxtrot commander sneaked undetected in attack range of an US Carrier while the president was on board. After that they hunted it for several days but it finaly shaked them of. If i remember right it wasn't in shallow water.

What i say is that everything is possible. While unlikely they will appear near the US coast they still can operate on the other side of the ocean not nessesarily in the middle of the ocean but still in the deep waters.

Kilo is designed to operate near the coast not in the middle of an ocean and it is deadly in that environment.

What makes it unsuitable for blue waters in your opinion ?

I never said the kilo wasn't deadly, it is deadly in littoral waters.

They are pretty deadly wherever the environmental situation will favour it, being it being it litoral or blue waters.

Take it to the middle of the ocean and it would have a very hard time going against a surface fleet + asw screening.
Why ? Becase of limited speed, the need to resurface to charge batteries, the limited range, the limited maneuvrability options etc....
All elements that american nuclear submarines don't have.

Well, yes the limited speed and endurance is the major disadvantage. But that doesn't render it harmless. When the battlegroup will cross it's way it might be in serious trouble when the acoustical situation will favour the kilo.

Now in littoral waters, low depth, poor sonar conditions, enourmous nuclear submarines have low maneuvrability, slow speed (you don't want to cavitate do you ? ) so in this case diesel submarines have the advantage.

With its 70 meters is the kilo not that small. Of corse the shallower water would be better. But i see no reason why they should be not dangerous in blue waters.

Deamon

[Kurushio]

On that thought...wouldn't it just be easier bombing the heck out of Iranian submarine bases, then actually going after the sub itself?



You want to start another war with Iran after Iraq ?
Even if I don't agree with Iran's viewpoint on trying to acquire military grade nuclear technology I see nonetheless a basic fact about nukes.
Countries that have nukes (in one form or another) are not attacked by us forces.
Why do you think that North Korea has never been attacked by us forces ?
North Korea poses a much more relevant threat to United States security than Iraq ever did.
And here we are seeing that the us uses preventive strikes only against non nuclear countries.
Something to think about.


Where did I say I wanted to start a war with Iran? I don't think it's up to me, anyway. :lol: I'm asking about tactics, that's all. Though a virtual war with Iran is a juicy proposition...has anyone made such a scenario as a mission or campaign for DW?

[goldorak]

Where did I say I wanted to start a war with Iran? I don't think it's up to me, anyway. :lol:


Of course, I was refering to the us.



I'm asking about tactics, that's all. Though a virtual war with Iran is a juicy proposition...has anyone made such a scenario as a mission or campaign for DW?

This is an interesting proposition.
What kind of scenario do you have in mind ? An us naval blocus ?
Iran navy units making havoc in the persian gulf and us navy comes to the rescue ?

[Kurushio]

This is my take on why the Kilo is considered a littoral/coastal boat and not an ocean/deep water one. First of all, the Kilo has limited range due to it being diesel propelled. So it could simply run out of diesel? You also have to factor in it has to surface every now and then...which is not a good idea in a shooting war, right?
Secondly, your making it do something it wasn;t built to do, i.e. fight in blue water environment against boats which were designed just for this purpose. Surely it wont be as good considering it was designed as a coastal defence boat.

There are people with much more of a valid opinion here but this just seems obvious to me.

[Kurushio]

This is an interesting proposition.
What kind of scenario do you have in mind ? An us naval blocus ?
Iran navy units making havoc in the persian gulf and us navy comes to the rescue ?

I would do something along those lines....or how I would see it. Where Iran would use hit and run tactics on the shipping lanes with the US doing escort and hunt and destroy. Though I've never used the editor before, so I have no idea what can be done.

To be honest with you...I think very similar missions already exist. :yep: Though I'd love a whole campaign sort of thing....

[Kapitan]

It could run out of diesel yes your quite right but with a 8,000nm range i dont think thats gunna happen much in the gulf whats more the kilo is actualy a medium range attack submarine and was designed for blue water as well as littoral waters, emphasis being on littoral.

[SeaQueen]

This is my take on why the Kilo is considered a littoral/coastal boat and not an ocean/deep water one. First of all, the Kilo has limited range due to it being diesel propelled. So it could simply run out of diesel?

Also, add to that the fact that it's not very fast.

[Wildcat]

Uboats managed just fine during the 1940's out in the middle of the ocean. The things that stopped them were air patrols, radar and constant active sonar use.

With those things in mind, what's stopping a KILO from transiting on the surface or snorkeling to a patrol zone or choke point?

If advanced knowledge of a convoy or even just a single ship is available, it's pretty easy for them to just sit there and wait to be overrun.

And with radar detection abilities, they can detect any aircraft or ships with radar on long before they can be spotted visually (or on radar for that matter).

It's not worth underestimating the usefulness of an Iranian kilo.

We are basically talking about a sub that is far better than a type 21 electric uboat, and although western technologies have improved drastically, the element of surprise has remained the same since ww2. If a sub commander knows where a ship is going to be, he can sit there and wait at 1 knot for days until he's ready to attack passing ships.

[Deamon]

First of all, the Kilo has limited range due to it being diesel propelled.

That doesn't mean that it cannot operate in deep waters. And honestly all vehicles have a limited range :)

So it could simply run out of diesel?

A nuke could also run out of fuel if it cruises to long without refuling. What's your point ? Ah you mean the Kilo cannot cruise for ever ? Well that's true but 8000nm seem to me enough to get to blue waters operate there and get back if the blue water is close enough to the home base. Of course if the tactical situation permits could a tender be placed forward and refule them, if the situation would require it to let them operate so far away from the home base.

You also have to factor in it has to surface every now and then...which is not a good idea in a shooting war, right?

Ahh, you mean snurkel ? :)

The time where diesel/electric boats had to surface now and then are gone since WWII. ;)

Without any doubt is snurkeling a hell of a tactical disadvantage. That doesn't mean it cannot operate in blue waters. Even if a sub is build explicitely for coastile operations, that doesn't mean it cannot operate in blue waters. Like the type 206a that is truly a coastile sub but still operates in the carribian during manouvers and "blow" ships out of the water.

It's surviveability might be questionable AFTER it releases it's weapos. Obviously it can't run away like a nuke and can miss the BG much easier than a nuke. But it's alot harder to detect. And when the BG comes close enough to it then it's in trouble(and the Kilo too). But trading a Kilo for a carrier is a good deal.

Secondly, your making it do something it wasn;t built to do, i.e. fight in blue water environment against boats which were designed just for this purpose.

It's finaly up to the naval command and the circumstances what they will be tasked against and where. Was the type VII a blue water sub ? And still it fought in blue waters. You learn something from history, do ya ?

And who have said that they were not build for blue waters ? And how should they have been build in your opinion in order to be blue water capeable ?

Look i can build tanks to defend my country. That means it's a devensive weapon. But that doesn't mean i cannot attack with it. You getting my point ?

BTW: The Kilo was meant to replace the Whiskeys that operated in the shallow waters of the east sea and the black sea. It's shorter and thicker hull suggest that it's definately shallow water capeable. But it's designed as a conventional all-purpose attack submarine. Thus its designation SS and not SSK. Capeable of shallow and blue waters as well, given the blue water is within it's operational range.

The only real difference betwin a coastile diesel/electric submaine and a blue water diesel/electric submarine that i see is the range(size) and maybe a bigger weapon store and some other minor things like a more thiner and longer hull. Did i left anything significant out ?

The Kilo seem to have all equipment to hunt even submarines. The only disadvantage is it's conventional propulsion system and it's range that will permit blue water operation when its fuel source is close enough to it.

There are people with much more of a valid opinion here but this just seems obvious to me.

Sorry i didn't meant to question your authority on submarine operations :oops:

BTW: Kaptain are you sure that it has a range of 8000nm ? My source states 6000nm for the Kilo.

Deamon

[Deamon]

It's not worth underestimating the usefulness of an Iranian kilo.

Oh yeah, and diesel/electric u-boats were underestimated in two world wars to a high prize. I just want to reminde on U 53(715t) in WWI that crossed the atlantic paid a short visit to USA and then moved back home without refuling!

Not blue water capeable eh ?

Deamon

[Henson]

It's not that a kilo cannot be effective at all in blue water. The issue is that it is much MORE effective in close, littoral waters where contacts are moving slower and the environment is more constrained.

When you're driving to the grocery store do you drive down the street, or do you travel across three states?

Iran's navy has a different purpose than any superpower navy. The US Navy is built to project power, while the iranians are concerned with controlling a small patch of real estate for as long a period as possible.

Here is an example of a realistic problem of a Kilo against a CG and DDG (both ASW threats). A Kilo is cruising at 4 kts. A Surface Action Group is cruising at 25kts. The slowest this problem could develop is 21kts. If the periscope detection range of the kilo is 16Kyds and the best weapon range is 9Kyds, the kilo has a 10 minute window of time with which to maneuver into position and attack. That assumes that the SAG is headed directly towards the sub and the sub remains headed directly away from the SAG. If the situation were less than this ideal (which would more than likely be the case) there would be even less time to react. Add to that the Kilo's speed. At 4 kts (which is generous) the sub is only moving 133 yds/min. In that ten minute window of time the Kilo would only be capable of moving about 1/2 mile with any degree of stealth. Each knot that he puts into the line of sight works against his ticking clock, and if the SAG is zigging then he has very little opportunity to correct mistakes or react to changes.

The Kilo either has to be in perfect position already prepared to fire, or he has to get a shot at the stern of passing targets...not an ideal shot.

The blue water problem is possible, but not effective. Basically the Kilo has to get lucky. I would rather wait at a choke point where I KNOW ships will come. At that, the Kilo excels.

[Deamon]

You have some good points Henson,

and that's why it would be a good idea to put a chain of Kilos where the BG is expected to pass.

The blue water problem is possible, but not effective. Basically the Kilo has to get lucky. I would rather wait at a choke point where I KNOW ships will come. At that, the Kilo excels.

That would be an ideal situation. But that is also where the BG would expect you to be. I'm also woundering how fast a modern Kilo can go while maintaing stealth.

Deamon

[Henson]

I'm also woundering how fast a modern Kilo can go while maintaing stealth.

Deamon

At shallow depths (ie PD, where ASUW attacks are carried out), no submarine can safely go very fast. At higher speeds, errors in depth control are magnified because the boat can 'run away' from you and give the Dive little time to react. Also, it is possible to literally bend a periscope and fairing if you move too fast.

In game it's just assumed that when you order a depth it will be maintained. In real life it's a bit more dicey, especially in higher swells that are typical of blue-water deep ocean environments. Direction of seas matters as well.

The other consideration is periscope feather. There are some compelling pictures out there of what a periscope feather/persicope wake looks like at different speeds. It makes a huge difference in detectability.

[Deamon]

At shallow depths (ie PD, where ASUW attacks are carried out), no submarine can safely go very fast. At higher speeds, errors in depth control are magnified because the boat can 'run away' from you and give the Dive little time to react. Also, it is possible to literally bend a periscope and fairing if you move too fast.

Why not attack from deeper below and come to PD only to confirm your target and then dive again for attack ?

In game it's just assumed that when you order a depth it will be maintained.

Yes. While i have no naval service experiance i realized pretty quick, after starting in depth researches and reading historical accounts, how little is actualy simulated in all the games, and how much subtle aspects there are.

In real life it's a bit more dicey, especially in higher swells that are typical of blue-water deep ocean environments. Direction of seas matters as well.

The other consideration is periscope feather. There are some compelling pictures out there of what a periscope feather/persicope wake looks like at different speeds. It makes a huge difference in detectability.

This is basicaly the depth i want to give to my own project. There is so much stuff missig in games. It's often hardly a challange.

Feather ? Do you mean the spray around the scope ?

Do you know where to get some of that feather images ? I'm always looking for stuff like that.

Deamon

[TLAM Strike]

Smokeboat Diesels + Deep Water Sound Transmission Paths = Easy detections for SURTASS and TACTASS units at long range.

Think about it your operating in deep water where there are CZs and your signal goes much farther since there is no nice seafloor 200 feet down. A single CZ can bounce your signal 30 something miles away. Imagine if a P-3 or P-8 got wind of your operating area from Ocean Floor Sensors and started putting buoys every 15 miles, each one of those has about a 50% chance of detecting you and if you move on your diesels the odds of detection go up from there.

[Deamon]

Smokeboat Diesels + Deep Water Sound Transmission Paths = Easy detections for SURTASS and TACTASS units at long range.

Yes, the diesel blue water combo sucks. But in the near future AIP's will rule this out. Then this will be a whole different ball game.

Think about it your operating in deep water where there are CZs

Don't snurkel in CZ's!

and your signal goes much farther since there is no nice seafloor 200 feet down.

Try to snurkel in bad acoustical conditions like bad weather conditions if possible or close to a loud ship for example. Don't snurkel with diesels running full speed. Let the diesels also run at different rpm's to avoid resonances.

Imagine if a P-3 or P-8 got wind of your operating area from Ocean Floor Sensors and started putting buoys every 15 miles, each one of those has about a 50% chance of detecting you and if you move on your diesels the odds of detection go up from there.

Buoys require calm seas. 3 meters high waves cause a transmission loss of 75% and 4,6 meters high waves cause a total transmission loss.

So if possible don't snurkel in calm seas in the enemies backyard. SOSUS is of course not your friend but eddies :)

AFAIK it's hopeless to track subs in eddies.

Deamon

[TLAM Strike]

Smokeboat Diesels + Deep Water Sound Transmission Paths = Easy detections for SURTASS and TACTASS units at long range.

Yes, the diesel blue water combo sucks. But in the near future AIP's will rule this out. Then this will be a whole different ball game. Well Iran doesn’t have any AIP subs so that’s beyond the scope of this discussion.

Think about it your operating in deep water where there are CZs

Don't snurkel in CZ's! It may come down to snorkeling or dieing a dark cold death from CO2 poisoning.

and your signal goes much farther since there is no nice seafloor 200 feet down.

Try to snurkel in bad acoustical conditions like bad weather conditions if possible... You would not say that if you ever snorkeled in bad weather.

the COB maybe God but he dosn't control the weather.

...or close to a loud ship for example. Don't snurkel with diesels running full speed. Let the diesels also run at different rpm's to avoid resonances. Good Points.

Imagine if a P-3 or P-8 got wind of your operating area from Ocean Floor Sensors and started putting buoys every 15 miles, each one of those has about a 50% chance of detecting you and if you move on your diesels the odds of detection go up from there.

Buoys require calm seas. 3 meters high waves cause a transmission loss of 75% and 4,6 meters high waves cause a total transmission loss.

So if possible don't snurkel in calm seas in the enemies backyard. SOSUS is of course not your friend but eddies :)

AFAIK it's hopeless to track subs in eddies.

Deamon See above in regads to God.

[Deamon]

the COB maybe God but he dosn't control the weather.

Ok, you won :)

But who is COB ?

[TLAM Strike]

the COB maybe God but he dosn't control the weather.

Ok, you won :)

But who is COB ?The Chief of the Boat. (http://www.olgoat.com/substuff/dex17.htm)
http://img372.imageshack.us/img372/8482/requin81nm.th.gif (http://img372.imageshack.us/my.php?image=requin81nm.gif)

[goldorak]

There is one thing i don't understand.
Buoys go to predetermined depths way below the surface.
So in what sense are they limited by bad weather ? :hmm:

[Deamon]

There is one thing i don't understand.
Buoys go to predetermined depths way below the surface.
So in what sense are they limited by bad weather ? :hmm:

That is the thing i also quite don't understand. I got it from my submarine book. Maybe it's the data link loss that is meant. Can someone confirm this ?

Deamon

[OneShot]

The only reason I could think off would be the buoy which is on the surface end of ther cable (and where the nice antenna is) would be washed over to often to keep up a good data stream, but then this is just guessing.

[The Noob]

Diesel Boats Forever! :smug:

[Kurushio]

the COB maybe God but he dosn't control the weather.

Excellent! :lol: This could easily be a Clancy line. Hey, if you see it in his next book, ask him for some money. :up:

By the way...excellent discussion...

[Deamon]

The only reason I could think off would be the buoy which is on the surface end of ther cable (and where the nice antenna is) would be washed over to often to keep up a good data stream, but then this is just guessing.

That's it i think. I remember a german submariner telling how difficult it is to send a radio message via the radioantenna mast. One little contact of the antenna with the water and you can forget your message. For buoys it must be even more worse. Not only the waves but also all the spray flying around near the surface and the atmospheric humidity right above the waves should be also high. It seems very resonable to assume that the transmission would be wracked havoc. High waves could also interrupt the direct transmission line betwin the buoy and plane/helo.

And:

While the hydrophone of the buoy hangs deeper below the surface wouldn't the buoy cause it to move up and down with the waves ? And wouldn't that cause flow noise or is this insignificant ? And can this affect the bearing accuracy when the buoy and hydrophon hanging on it turns ? Isn't there a mechanism in the buoy that tells where the hydrophon points to ?

BTW: Up to whitch sea stat can helos start and land on the deck ? I guess that also depends on the size of the ship.

That all could be very favourable for the Kilo.

Deamon

[Kurushio]

Something nobody has mentioned yet...the difference between the improved Kilo (636) or the Iranian 877. Would that make a real difference on anything?

This may not sound very politically correct, though on the Itanian Kilo, wouldn't prayer times give away it's position? You do realise they MUST pray at certain times, five times a day and if they couldn't it would surely be bad for morale so would work against them in that regard. Either way...I don't think an Iranian Kilo would be that successful.

[MaHuJa]

I believe the kilos would make several kills before getting killed; for the simple reason that they will, as long as possible, attack "value ships" that are not escorted.

THEN comes the "escorted supertanker convoy" type scenario that this thread began discussing.

[Wildcat]

Something nobody has mentioned yet...the difference between the improved Kilo (636) or the Iranian 877. Would that make a real difference on anything?

This may not sound very politically correct, though on the Itanian Kilo, wouldn't prayer times give away it's position? You do realise they MUST pray at certain times, five times a day and if they couldn't it would surely be bad for morale so would work against them in that regard. Either way...I don't think an Iranian Kilo would be that successful.

Now that's just being rediculous.

The Iranians may be completely crazy but they are definately not stupid. You don't have to be stupid to be crazy. Give them more credit.

Giving the boat position away at prayer times is nonsense. They are not just going to start broadcasting their location every day at 5pm sharp, all 50 or 60 people on the boat at a time. Come on!

Diesel electric subs are still a VERY dangerous threat and are the only reason ASW continues to be studied and improved on to this day. Who else is going to present a threat? All the other nations with nuclear submarines are either A) Allies or B) Far behind in nuclear quieting technology.

Allied forces could make due with what they have right now to detect any enemy nuclear submarines may be out there. That is definately not the case with the SSK's and continual advancements are being made because there is a legitimate threat to shipping from SSK's, EVEN in open ocean.

[Henson]

This may not sound very politically correct, though on the Itanian Kilo, wouldn't prayer times give away it's position? You do realise they MUST pray at certain times, five times a day and if they couldn't it would surely be bad for morale so would work against them in that regard. Either way...I don't think an Iranian Kilo would be that successful.

It would have to be very loud speaker indeed to carry that kind of noise outside the people-tank.

It would be no different than using MC circuits on american boats, something we do constantly. The engineering spaces on a nuc can actually be quite loud: we just learned how to keep the noise inside.

[Kapitan]

American has been loaned a diesel submarine from sweden a whole year its been practicing with the americans and what happend no one could find the dam thing, in the end i heard the war games were scripted to give the acctualy american fleet something to do.

[goldorak]

Well when it comes down to diesel submarines the us navy establishment is very very paranoic.
Some years ago (but maybe this trend continues to this day) the american navy forbade us naval shipwards from accepting foreign contracts to build diesel subs.
Maybe one day they'll realise that abbandoning completly convential propulsion in subs was a mistake.

[Wildcat]

Well it does serve some purpose, for one it prevents the sheep of congress from demanding that the US navy decomission all its nuke boats and switch to diesel. Sounds far fetched but you can be sure someone would try to make it happen. :yep:

[Molon Labe]

Well it does serve some purpose, for one it prevents the sheep of congress from demanding that the US navy decomission all its nuke boats and switch to diesel. Sounds far fetched but you can be sure someone would try to make it happen. :yep:


...damn hippies made us build two oil burners after the Enterprise. What the hell were they thinking? :nope:

[Wildcat]

Well I'm not saying it's entirely a good thing, but it does have its uses, like protecting the jobs of thousands of shipyard workers.

Kitty Hawk is a bit of a different issue since its range and speed is far greater than that of a diesel sub, plus it's needed to be based in Japan where they really won't tolerate a nuclear carrier in their waters.

[Molon Labe]

Kitty Hawk was before the Enterprise. I'm bitching about the America and JFK.

Japan's already acquiesed to the Washington. Too bad it wasn't the Truman or Nimitz, eh?

[goldorak]

Well it does serve some purpose, for one it prevents the sheep of congress from demanding that the US navy decomission all its nuke boats and switch to diesel. Sounds far fetched but you can be sure someone would try to make it happen. :yep:


In all honesty I fail to realise how this would be possibile.
Rickover's ghost must still be lingering in congress and the pentagon. :rotfl:

[TLAM Strike]

Rickover's ghost must still be lingering in congress and the pentagon. :rotfl:I think they need to call in a Priest and exorcize the place. He might need to use diesel oil instead of Holy Water and a piston in place of a cross... :D

[Deadeye313]

guys, that strait seems pretty small. At only 21 miles wide, what's to keep US helos, P-3s and FFGs from pinging the hell out of the entire gulf?

I too think that using the Iranian subs will be a one way ticket.

First, they won't have a home port to go to. Those will be the first places bombed. Second, there won't be replenishment ships, they'd be at the bottom of the gulf before they got to the kilos. Third, the gulf's not that big, a dozen pinging FFGs or a hundred or two active bouies monitored by aircraft would cover the entire gulf.

I give the Iranian subs a week before we know where each and every one is and sinks it. hell, we probably already have spies who know the status of the boats just as well as the chief engineers do.

[TLAM Strike]

guys, that strait seems pretty small. At only 21 miles wide, what's to keep US helos, P-3s and FFGs from pinging the hell out of the entire gulf?
Until they get rid of these they arn't going to be pinging nothing...
http://img223.imageshack.us/img223/1161/mig29ddst8708703jpg2rk.jpg
http://img223.imageshack.us/img223/2976/sa5lncr4on.gif
;)

[Deadeye313]

And those have to deal with this:

http://www.mis.mit.edu.tw/~mis0238/atoair_F-22_8.jpg

and we've long since reduced anti-sam work to a science, if Afghanistan and Iraq are any indication.

[goldorak]

And those have to deal with this:

http://www.mis.mit.edu.tw/~mis0238/atoair_F-22_8.jpg

and we've long since reduced anti-sam work to a science, if Afghanistan and Iraq are any indication.

Kind of overkill to just sink a few kilo's don't you think ?
Americans have a tendency to consider themselves invincible and underestimate the adversary. History teaches otherwise.
What happens if an f-22 is shot down (those are damn expensive planes) ?
Look what happened to an F-117 in serbia.
Just don't underestimate air defenses.
The point is that the iranians if they went for the interdiction and eventually attack of us ships, us navy would have to put a lot of resources just to negate the kilo's doing any kind of damage.
In the end its the americans who stand to loose much more in an irian sub vs us navy confrontation than the contrary.

[TLAM Strike]

And those have to deal with this:

http://www.mis.mit.edu.tw/~mis0238/atoair_F-22_8.jpg

and we've long since reduced anti-sam work to a science, if Afghanistan and Iraq are any indication.
http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/7443/f117nn16md.jpg
Its amazing what you can do with an old SA-3, a stopwatch, a few cell phones and a radio tower. ;)

I bet if we start flying missions over Iran everyone with a rifle is going to be shooting up at the sky. A few hits from AAA can really compromise you RCS and damage all those sensitive computers we Americans love in our jets. :roll:

[Kurushio]

The reason I came up with the prayer thing on the Kilo is because Iran is an Islamic Republic...so isn't that a requirement that they pray? No secularism in Iran... It would be interesting to see how they handle it though considering your have to get about 60 people to pray at roughly the same time in a confined space. :hmm:

I think the Iranians have F14 A s don't they? And only about 15 are useable considering they had to canabalise a few for parts (they had an original of approx 80 I believe). The As are obselete, late 70s fighters...they wouldn't stand a chance. The Iraqis had a few squadrons of at least valid Mig 29s and they never managed to down a US plane.

You have to put things into perspective...yes the Yugoslavs downed an FA/117, though ultimately they lost the conflict and were kicked back to wear they came from. I think that's cost effective, if you think about it. An F22 for an F14 isn't cost effective, you may think. But chances are they'll never even get close to shooting down an F22 in air-to-air. If you consider a US F15 has never been shot down in aerial combat and has a kill ratio of about 200:1 and now consider the F22 is head and shoulders above the F15 in terms of technology etc.

Iran can only wage an unconventional war against the US...forget the Iranian airforce playing a part in the conflict.

[goldorak]

The reason I came up with the prayer thing on the Kilo is because Iran is an Islamic Republic...so isn't that a requirement that they pray? No secularism in Iran... It would be interesting to see how they handle it though considering your have to get about 60 people to pray at roughly the same time in a confined space. :hmm:


Be serious.
Lets se for instance tghe iranian air force.
What happens if a fighter pilot is flying during prayer time ? You think he puts the autopilot and starts praying ? :roll:


Iran can only wage an unconventional war against the US...forget the Iranian airforce playing a part in the conflict.


Going against us warships can scarcely be considered as unconventional warfare.
And the problem here is not that Iran is going to invade the us, but the contrary.
What kind of reponse can the us implement against an agressive iranian navy ?
In this scenario us is at a disadvantage short of invading Iran in the old fashioned way (which means not as was done in Iraq).
In any case its the us thats stands to loose much more than iraq in a conventional confrontation in the persian gulf.

[TLAM Strike]

The reason I came up with the prayer thing on the Kilo is because Iran is an Islamic Republic...so isn't that a requirement that they pray? No secularism in Iran... It would be interesting to see how they handle it though considering your have to get about 60 people to pray at roughly the same time in a confined space. :hmm:
You know if you really want an answer you could always Ask and Iman (http://www.islam.tc/ask-imam/). :lol:

(Just make sure to sign the question 'Sincerely, United States Navy' :lol: )

[TLAM Strike]

The reason I came up with the prayer thing on the Kilo is because Iran is an Islamic Republic...so isn't that a requirement that they pray? No secularism in Iran... It would be interesting to see how they handle it though considering your have to get about 60 people to pray at roughly the same time in a confined space. :hmm:


Be serious.
Lets se for instance tghe iranian air force.
What happens if a fighter pilot is flying during prayer time ? You think he puts the autopilot and starts praying ? :roll:

(I’m going to need a rimshot on this one…)

Why not he’s already on his Flying Carpet!

:-j

Seriously a fighter pilot is different, they can pray before flying (and probity would before a combat mission). They are not stuck in side their jets for weeks at a time.

[Kurushio]

Be serious.
Lets se for instance tghe iranian air force.
What happens if a fighter pilot is flying during prayer time ? You think he puts the autopilot and starts praying ? :roll:

An airforce pilot doesn't live on the plane, a sub crew does. You think they will never pray for the entire time they are deployed on the sub?




Going against us warships can scarcely be considered as unconventional warfare.
And the problem here is not that Iran is going to invade the us, but the contrary.
What kind of reponse can the us implement against an agressive iranian navy ?
In this scenario us is at a disadvantage short of invading Iran in the old fashioned way (which means not as was done in Iraq).
In any case its the us thats stands to loose much more than iraq in a conventional confrontation in the persian gulf.

You really think any branch of the Iranian military has a chance against the US? I'm sorry, then you don't know anything about warfare. I discussed the possible invasion of Iran to death on a military forum some time ago. You fail to understand that the US is like the guy with an ace up his sleave at the poker table. The US military cheats, does not play fair...and why should it. It's war. They have the cards all stacked in their favour. But enough of the cliches...here's why:

The US is the only nation left in the world where it truly has the capability to combines it's forces. What will an Iranian surface vessel do against incoming hostile aircraft? Now, you see, a capable airforce running CAP would be useful here...but, guess again. Iran doesn't have an airforce. So, when the US airforce runs wild-weasels against SAM sights, who is going to stop them? There's your same problem again...

Countries like Iran are like someone playing chess with one of piece at a time against the US who is using all 16 pieces. :up:

[Kurushio]

You know if you really want an answer you could always Ask and Iman (http://www.islam.tc/ask-imam/). :lol:

(Just make sure to sign the question 'Sincerely, United States Navy' :lol: )

:rotfl: :rotfl:

[goldorak]

An airforce pilot doesn't live on the plane, a sub crew does. You think they will never pray for the entire time they are deployed on the sub?


Sure but that doesn't mean that the sub will surface.




You really think any branch of the Iranian military has a chance against the US? I'm sorry, then you don't know anything about warfare. I discussed the possible invasion of Iran to death on a military forum some time ago. You fail to understand that the US is like the guy with an ace up his sleave at the poker table. The US military cheats, does not play fair...and why should it. It's war. They have the cards all stacked in their favour. But enough of the cliches...here's why:


Nobody is talking about an all out confrontation between iranian navy and the us navy.
We were talking about the effectiveness of kilo submarines vis a vis civilian shipping in the persian gulf and also us military ships.
You sure know what happened to the USS Cole ?
And in that case a sub wasn't even needed.
The point is that surface fleets (any military surface fleet) is at a disadvantage when it is stationary or when it has limited manuevrability options against subs or suicide boats.


The US is the only nation left in the world where it truly has the capability to combines it's forces. What will an Iranian surface vessel do against incoming hostile aircraft? Now, you see, a capable airforce running CAP would be useful here...but, guess again. Iran doesn't have an airforce. So, when the US airforce runs wild-weasels against SAM sights, who is going to stop them? There's your same problem again...


You're continuosly underestimating air defense networks. :nope:
In any case we are talking about submarines and submarines couldn't care less of airplanes.


Countries like Iran are like someone playing chess with one of piece at a time against the US who is using all 16 pieces. :up:

The difference is to use the chess metaphore that the us king is much more valuable than the iranian king.
And this is why us fleet is at a disadvantage.
The iranians have only to score one hit on a us aircarft carrier.
It would sure be a one way mission but you could agree that the loss of an aircraft carrier is much more appealing to the iranians than the sinking of a poor kilo is to the us.

[Wildcat]

Iran doesn't have an airforce. So, when the US airforce runs wild-weasels against SAM sights, who is going to stop them?


Iran has an airforce, including but not limited to F-14's with Phoenix missiles sold by the US to Iran. You'd better believe they work because the Iranians shot down a crapload of Iraqi airplanes with them. They've got a number of other Russian designs, and you can be sure Iran has a lot more money to spend on military training than most other countries, given its extremely vast quantities of oil.

BTW as far as I know the US does not any longer have wild weasels and now relies solely on UAV's and precision munitions for extremely hazardous duty like SAM hunting.

Some of you guys just don't want to give any credit at all. It'd be a big nasty wakeup call if the US military operated the way you guys are thinking about going about it.

And that prayer boat thing... absolutely rediculous, we're talking about a military here. If they're in danger, they're not going to aggravate the problem by stopping duties to pray. :hmm: Sometimes I wonder about you guys!

[TLAM Strike]

In any case we are talking about submarines and submarines couldn't care less of airplanes. I'm sure the German U-Boatmen thought the same at the start of WWII. :roll:

BTW as far as I know the US does not any longer have wild weasels and now relies solely on UAV's and precision munitions for extremely hazardous duty like SAM hunting. Uhhh we still have the EA-6B Power for Jamming. The new F/A-18G Growler for SEAD (starting in '08) and the standard Hornets for SEAD in the mean time. The EF-111A Spark Varks have only been out of service for a few years and could theoretically be reactivated if necessary, the same goes for the F-4Gs as well. The F-16 Falcon can carry the HARM missile.

If our UK allies back us up we have the Tornado with its kick ass ALARM missile on our side.

And that prayer boat thing... absolutely rediculous, we're talking about a military here. If they're in danger, they're not going to aggravate the problem by stopping duties to pray. :hmm: Sometimes I wonder about you guys! Its a vaild question IMHO. Remember "Black Hawk Down"; all the militiamen stopped fighting for their evening prayers.

[Deadeye313]

I know how to settle this: do a custom senario! :ping:

put like 5 kilos on that Strait of Hormuz and make 3 or 4 OHPs, some P-3s out of Iraq or Kuwait and a fleet of US warships try to break through. If you want, put in Migs and F-14s and all kinds of junk that would really be there if we went to war.

Then we can see how long the kilos last and how much they take out.

[Smaragdadler]

You should add some more little detail to your scenario. To make it more 'challenge'. ;)


Iran: A Bridge too Far?

The weapon that could defeat the US in the Gulf

http://liberty.hypermart.net/images/Moskit_320kg_missile.jpg

[...]

The problem is that so many of us suffer from two common misperceptions. The first follows from our assumption that Russia is militarily weak, as a result of the breakup of the old Soviet system. Actually, this is accurate, but it does not reflect the complexities. Although the Russian navy continues to rust in port, and the Russian army is in disarray, in certain key areas Russian technology is actually superior to our own. And nowhere is this truer than in the vital area of anti-ship cruise missile technology, where the Russians hold at least a ten-year lead over the US. The second misperception has to do with our complacency in general about missiles-as-weapons –– probably attributable to the pathetic performance of Saddam Hussein’s Scuds during the first Gulf war: a dangerous illusion that I will now attempt to rectify.

Many years ago, Soviet planners gave up trying to match the US Navy ship for ship, gun for gun, and dollar for dollar. The Soviets simply could not compete with the high levels of US spending required to build up and maintain a huge naval armada. They shrewdly adopted an alternative approach based on strategic defense. They searched for weaknesses, and sought relatively inexpensive ways to exploit those weaknesses. The Soviets succeeded: by developing several supersonic anti-ship missiles, one of which, the SS-N-22 Sunburn, has been called “the most lethal missile in the world today.”

After the collapse of the Soviet Union the old military establishment fell upon hard times. But in the late1990s Moscow awakened to the under-utilized potential of its missile technology to generate desperately needed foreign exchange. A decision was made to resuscitate selected programs, and, very soon, Russian missile technology became a hot export commodity. Today, Russian missiles are a growth industry generating much-needed cash for Russia, with many billions in combined sales to India, China, Viet Nam, Cuba, and also Iran. In the near future this dissemination of advanced technology is likely to present serious challenges to the US. Some have even warned that the US Navy’s largest ships, the massive carriers, have now become floating death traps, and should for this reason be mothballed.


The Sunburn can deliver a 200-kiloton nuclear payload, or: a 750-pound conventional warhead, within a range of 100 miles, more than twice the range of the Exocet. The Sunburn combines a Mach 2.1 speed (two times the speed of sound) with a flight pattern that hugs the deck and includes “violent end maneuvers” to elude enemy defenses. The missile was specifically designed to defeat the US Aegis radar defense system. Should a US Navy Phalanx point defense somehow manage to detect an incoming Sunburn missile, the system has only seconds to calculate a fire solution –– not enough time to take out the intruding missile. The US Phalanx defense employs a six-barreled gun that fires 3,000 depleted-uranium rounds a minute, but the gun must have precise coordinates to destroy an intruder “just in time.”

The Sunburn’s combined supersonic speed and payload size produce tremendous kinetic energy on impact, with devastating consequences for ship and crew. A single one of these missiles can sink a large warship, yet costs considerably less than a fighter jet. Although the Navy has been phasing out the older Phalanx defense system, its replacement, known as the Rolling Action Missile (RAM) has never been tested against the weapon it seems destined to one day face in combat.

The US Navy’s only plausible defense against a robust weapon like the Sunburn missile is to detect the enemy’s approach well ahead of time, whether destroyers, subs, or fighter-bombers, and defeat them before they can get in range and launch their deadly cargo. For this purpose US AWACs radar planes assigned to each naval battle group are kept aloft on a rotating schedule. The planes “see” everything within two hundred miles of the fleet, and are complemented with intelligence from orbiting satellites.


But US naval commanders operating in the Persian Gulf face serious challenges that are unique to the littoral, i.e., coastal, environment. A glance at a map shows why: The Gulf is nothing but a large lake, with one narrow outlet, and most of its northern shore, i.e., Iran, consists of mountainous terrain that affords a commanding tactical advantage over ships operating in Gulf waters. The rugged northern shore makes for easy concealment of coastal defenses, such as mobile missile launchers, and also makes their detection problematic. Although it was not widely reported, the US actually lost the battle of the Scuds in the first Gulf War –– termed “the great Scud hunt” –– and for similar reasons. Saddam Hussein’s mobile Scud launchers proved so difficult to detect and destroy –– over and over again the Iraqis fooled allied reconnaissance with decoys –– that during the course of Desert Storm the US was unable to confirm even a single kill. This proved such an embarrassment to the Pentagon, afterwards, that the unpleasant stats were buried in official reports. But the blunt fact is that the US failed to stop the Scud attacks. The launches continued until the last few days of the conflict. Luckily, the Scud’s inaccuracy made it an almost useless weapon. At one point General Norman Schwarzkopf quipped dismissively to the press that his soldiers had a greater chance of being struck by lightning in Georgia than by a Scud in Kuwait.

But that was then, and it would be a grave error to allow the Scud’s ineffectiveness to blur the facts concerning this other missile. The Sunburn’s amazing accuracy was demonstrated not long ago in a live test staged at sea by the Chinese –– and observed by US spy planes. Not only did the Sunburn missile destroy the dummy target ship, it scored a perfect bull’s eye, hitting the crosshairs of a large “X” mounted on the ship’s bridge. The only word that does it justice, awesome, has become a cliché, hackneyed from hyperbolic excess.

The US Navy has never faced anything in combat as formidable as the Sunburn missile. But this will surely change if the US and Israel decide to wage a so-called preventive war against Iran to destroy its nuclear infrastructure.

[...]

Let us pray that the US sailors who are unlucky enough to be on duty in the Persian Gulf when the shooting starts can escape the fate of the Roman army at Cannae. The odds will be heavily against them, however, because they will face the same type of danger, tantamount to envelopment. The US ships in the Gulf will already have come within range of the Sunburn missiles and the even more-advanced SS-NX-26 Yakhonts missiles, also Russian-made (speed: Mach 2.9; range: 180 miles) deployed by the Iranians along the Gulf’s northern shore. Every US ship will be exposed and vulnerable. When the Iranians spring the trap, the entire lake will become a killing field.

Anti-ship cruise missiles are not new, as I’ve mentioned. Nor have they yet determined the outcome in a conflict. But this is probably only because these horrible weapons have never been deployed in sufficient numbers. At the time of the Falklands war the Argentine air force possessed only five Exocets, yet managed to sink two ships. With enough of them, the Argentineans might have sunk the entire British fleet, and won the war. Although we’ve never seen a massed attack of cruise missiles, this is exactly what the US Navy could face in the next war in the Gulf. Try and imagine it if you can: barrage after barrage of Exocet-class missiles, which the Iranians are known to possess in the hundreds, as well as the unstoppable Sunburn and Yakhonts missiles. The questions that our purblind government leaders should be asking themselves, today, if they value what historians will one day write about them, are two: how many of the Russian anti-ship missiles has Putin already supplied to Iran? And: How many more are currently in the pipeline? In 2001 Jane’s Defense Weekly reported that Iran was attempting to acquire anti-ship missiles from Russia. Ominously, the same report also mentioned that the more advanced Yakhonts missile was “optimized for attacks against carrier task forces.” Apparently its guidance system is “able to distinguish an aircraft carrier from its escorts.” The numbers were not disclosed…

The US Navy will come under fire even if the US does not participate in the first so-called surgical raids on Iran’s nuclear sites, that is, even if Israel goes it alone. Israel’s brand-new fleet of 25 F-15s (paid for by American taxpayers) has sufficient range to target Iran, but the Israelis cannot mount an attack without crossing US-occupied Iraqi air space. It will hardly matter if Washington gives the green light, or is dragged into the conflict by a recalcitrant Israel. Either way, the result will be the same. The Iranians will interpret US acquiescence as complicity, and, in any event, they will understand that the real fight is with the Americans. The Iranians will be entirely within their rights to counter-attack in self-defense. Most of the world will see it this way, and will support them, not America. The US and Israel will be viewed as the aggressors, even as the unfortunate US sailors in harm’s way become cannon fodder. In the Gulf’s shallow and confined waters evasive maneuvers will be difficult, at best, and escape impossible. Even if US planes control of the skies over the battlefield, the sailors caught in the net below will be hard-pressed to survive. The Gulf will run red with American blood…

From here, it only gets worse. Armed with their Russian-supplied cruise missiles, the Iranians will close the lake’s only outlet, the strategic Strait of Hormuz, cutting off the trapped and dying Americans from help and rescue. The US fleet massing in the Indian Ocean will stand by helplessly, unable to enter the Gulf to assist the survivors or bring logistical support to the other US forces on duty in Iraq. Couple this with a major new ground offensive by the Iraqi insurgents, and, quite suddenly, the tables could turn against the Americans in Baghdad. As supplies and ammunition begin to run out, the status of US forces in the region will become precarious. The occupiers will become the besieged…

With enough anti-ship missiles, the Iranians can halt tanker traffic through Hormuz for weeks, even months. With the flow of oil from the Gulf curtailed, the price of a barrel of crude will skyrocket on the world market. Within days the global economy will begin to grind to a halt. Tempers at an emergency round-the-clock session of the UN Security Council will flare and likely explode into shouting and recriminations as French, German, Chinese and even British ambassadors angrily accuse the US of allowing Israel to threaten world order. But, as always, because of the US veto the world body will be powerless to act...

America will stand alone, completely isolated. Yet, despite the increasingly hostile international mood, elements of the US media will spin the crisis very differently here at home, in a way that is sympathetic to Israel. Members of Congress will rise to speak in the House and Senate, and rally to Israel’s defense, while blaming the victim of the attack, Iran. Fundamentalist Christian talk show hosts will proclaim the historic fulfillment of biblical prophecy in our time, and will call upon the Jews of Israel to accept Jesus into their hearts; meanwhile, urging the president to nuke the evil empire of Islam. From across America will be heard histrionic cries for fresh reinforcements, even a military draft. Patriots will demand victory at any cost. Pundits will scream for an escalation of the conflict.

A war that ostensibly began as an attempt to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons will teeter on the brink of their use…

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7147.htm

[OKO]

The new F/A-18G Growler for SEAD

Well ... in fact, TLAM, the growler is an escort close-in jammer, but no more anti radiative, and you can even say less anti radiative, because it's really not his job (he is counter radiative, he doesnt destroy them, he make them blind), than E/F version carrying HARMs.
The goal of the growler is to give a jammer protection to a group of plane but not to engage any SAMs.

US doctrine hasn't changed here => there is a specialised aircraft who give a secured area to the group
French have a different way : each plane have his own sophisticated jamming system, quite complex, and more expensive for each plane.
Système SPECTRA, "supposed" to be the most sophisticated jamming system ever created for a fighter (but not to cover a group)
I didn't say this politic is better than the other, just mentionning.


I know how to settle this: do a custom senario!

put like 5 kilos on that Strait of Hormuz and make 3 or 4 OHPs, some P-3s out of Iraq or Kuwait and a fleet of US warships try to break through. If you want, put in Migs and F-14s and all kinds of junk that would really be there if we went to war.

Then we can see how long the kilos last and how much they take out.

gimme a KILO here ! :rock:

more seriously, I could read on that thread, that iranian air force could be a threat to US air force.
I disagree with that :
If i was the Iranian leader, I will know that the best way to lost ALL my aerian force will be to try to fight with americans on this matter.
In half a week, the iranian airforce will be downed.

So i'm absolutly sure, if the iranian leader is not only a stupid fanatic (that is still needed to be proven nevertheless ...) he will, as Hussein did, as Milosevic did, hide or send away (in other arabian countries) his precious (but ridiculous against the US one) air force, to get it back when the conflict will end.

So I don't expect any iranian aircraft to engage US air force if a war occurs.
maybe some kamikaze, but certainly not the whole air force.

Anyway, if a war occurs, there won't be only americans on this one : it's not an oil problem tis time, but a nuke problem.
If oil is vital for US more than for any other countries in the world (near 30% of worldwide use, 60% of US use is now imported, a US citizen need 4 times the oil of a french citizen per year), and justified, only to US gvnt, the 2nd Irak war (we all know there was not any mass destruction weapons there, and all was invented to start the oil war), nuke is dangerous for all democracy safety.
So, all NATO countries will be there, and certainly half UNO ...
No match for iranians.

even if the iranian leader looks fanatic and quite stupid (talking about his public position about israel ... no decent leader could have said that, except a stupid fanatic that doesn't worth to be president at all), he knows he couldn't sacrify his air force in half a week.
And if he is more stupid than that, he will lost it, and war will be shorter than expected.

[goldorak]

I'm sure the German U-Boatmen thought the same at the start of WWII. :roll:


I was refering to the sub being submerged.
Of course a sub on the surface is vulnerable to aircraft but what modern sub surfaces nowadays to carry an attack ? :roll:

[Wildcat]

In any case we are talking about submarines and submarines couldn't care less of airplanes. I'm sure the German U-Boatmen thought the same at the start of WWII. :roll:

BTW as far as I know the US does not any longer have wild weasels and now relies solely on UAV's and precision munitions for extremely hazardous duty like SAM hunting. Uhhh we still have the EA-6B Power for Jamming. The new F/A-18G Growler for SEAD (starting in '08) and the standard Hornets for SEAD in the mean time. The EF-111A Spark Varks have only been out of service for a few years and could theoretically be reactivated if necessary, the same goes for the F-4Gs as well. The F-16 Falcon can carry the HARM missile.

If our UK allies back us up we have the Tornado with its kick ass ALARM missile on our side.


That's an interesting thought but I don't think it would work. At this moment there are no wild weasels and I would bet a year's salary that even if the US went to war you would not see the varks or rhino's brought back into service. Those are basically gone for good. Especially with the F-22 now in service, congress would be asking 'why can't the raptor do it?'.

I agree that allies would play an important part; however; the EU and UN in general has shown itself to be kind of screwed up and I would not count on them being there at the critical time when the Iranian defecate hits the rotary.

FYI the F-18E and F also carry the HARM missile but that missile is dependent on the missile battery radiating in order to attack. If the sam site never radiates, it won't have a target to pick up. Additionally it is an entirely passive device so a smart commander in a mobile battery that shuts down and moves his radar around every once in a while is going to be hard to kill with a HARM. JSOW's are another likely possibility for sam hunting, but again that is very dangerous; there are a number of soviet technology sam batteries with longer range than the JSOW can glide from an F/A-18E or F. UAV's in that case make sense, as do tomahawk launches from inside the gulf (if subs or cruisers can get in there past the choke point).

Realise of course this is 'worst case scenario' thinking, but worst case scenario thinking is a hell of a lot better than best case scenario thinking. The Iranians have a lot of Russian tech that has yet to be seen in action, but we can assume a lot of it is good even if some of it is bad. The kilos are just one example of good Russian tech. Their limitations will be their torpedos not the boats.

[OKO]

...why can't the raptor do it?'...

some answers could be :
- the raptor have a small loadout compared to a FA/18, 3 or 4 time less bombs carried.
- the raptor cost 5 or 6 times (from memory, should be even more than that) the price of a FA18, and you better lost a FA18 than a raptor, because there is not so many.


I agree that allies would play an important part; however; the EU and UN in general has shown itself to be kind of screwed up and I would not count on them being there at the critical time when the Iranian defecate hits the rotary.

well ... don't you remember about afghanistan ?
When it's a real international threat, and not only a threat to US economy and international strategy, you will find people helping, as they did in afghanistan, as they did in balkans.
Of course, with not the same means than US army, but with their means.


The kilos are just one example of good Russian tech. Their limitations will be their torpedos not the boats.

And certainly also their crew.
But this point is more difficult to know, even if it's one of the most important thing at submarine warfare.

[Deamon]

I discussed the possible invasion of Iran to death on a military forum some time ago.

On whitch one ?

Deamon

[TLAM Strike]

I'm sure the German U-Boatmen thought the same at the start of WWII. :roll:


I was refering to the sub being submerged.
Of course a sub on the surface is vulnerable to aircraft but what modern sub surfaces nowadays to carry an attack ? :roll:
The point still stands otherwise the US Navy would not invest in 4 different Anti-Sub aircraft (Although 1 is going away now and 1 is being replaced.)


The new F/A-18G Growler for SEAD

Well ... in fact, TLAM, the growler is an escort close-in jammer, but no more anti radiative, and you can even say less anti radiative, because it's really not his job (he is counter radiative, he doesnt destroy them, he make them blind), than E/F version carrying HARMs.
The goal of the growler is to give a jammer protection to a group of plane but not to engage any SAMs. You are incorrect the Growler can carry two AGM-88 HARM missiles in addition to two AIM-120 AMRAAMs, 3 ALQ-99 jamming pods and two drop tanks.


US doctrine hasn't changed here => there is a specialised aircraft who give a secured area to the group
French have a different way : each plane have his own sophisticated jamming system, quite complex, and more expensive for each plane.
Système SPECTRA, "supposed" to be the most sophisticated jamming system ever created for a fighter (but not to cover a group)
I didn't say this politic is better than the other, just mentionning. Well that makes sense for the Armée de l'Air and Aviation Navale since they have a much smaller fleet than the USAF, USN and USMC all combined.

That's an interesting thought but I don't think it would work. At this moment there are no wild weasels and I would bet a year's salary that even if the US went to war you would not see the varks or rhino's brought back into service. Those are basically gone for good. Especially with the F-22 now in service, congress would be asking 'why can't the raptor do it?'. I've heard that some of the old A-6s have be quietly returned to service to help the US Border Patrol and USCG hunt smugglers (The TRAM FLIR turret and AN/APQ-156 Norden radar are a great pair). There are a bunch of A-6E in long term storage (War Reserve) at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base for such as an occasion as this. There is a reason we never sold the Intruder to anyone. ;)

I don't see why the EF-111A or F-4G wouldn't be returned to temporary service if they were placed in a similar state of reserve like the A-6Es. If not we can call up the RAAF and ask to borrow some of their F-111Bs.

[Kapitan]

Wars have rules so i immagine theres something like this.

When iran goes to pray then the americans must hold off as a sign of respect, they did in somalia the somalis stopped attacking and the americans didnt attack, even with that window of oppotunity.

But who knows

[Kurushio]

My brother-in-law is muslim....nice guy. No, the question I posed is valid in my opinion. Muslims have a calender telling them when to pray. Specifically at what time of the day depending where they are in the world. It's all very scientific. If you're a muslim you should pray. If you're a soldier/submariner in the Islamic Republic of Iran...it's a requirement. If you're both and are at war and could die any minute, well....most muslims will pray to cleanse their soul before meeting Allah. No need to surface the sub...they pray anywhere as long as they point towards Mecca (and no...no course change for the sub either...just prayer-mat course change).

Deamon, I'm ashamed to say it, but the military forum was called www.militaryphotos.net. I have limited military experience, nothing major (I once bought an army uniform off Ebay)...so not even worth discussing. Though I am a great military hobbyist and enthusiast and I take in Farnborough Airshow every time it's on. No seriously though...I'm ashamed to say I was a cavalry man and rode a tank to work once...so what the hell am I doing playing navy sims, you may ask. :lol: Good question...seriously though...I like every aspect of the military.

[OKO]

You are incorrect the Growler can carry two AGM-88 HARM missiles in addition to two AIM-120 AMRAAMs, 3 ALQ-99 jamming pods and two drop tanks.


Sure he won't be unarmed
the FA18 is really a fighter bomber, with a huge loadout
But you can imagine how the lost of the growler could be a real problem to the whole aerian group escorted : no more area jamming
So his first role is not to hunt SAM (there is only few growlers compared to FA18E/F fleet), but he can carry HARM for self protection.
In the simulation FA18E of jane's, you have 3 different targeting mode. One of them consist to give immediate priority to HARM, because a lock from a SAM was detected. If you have selected this, then you just have to press the release button to engage the threat and move away.
This should be probably the only fonction the growler will use.
If US army wants to destroy SAM with harm, they will send FA18 E/F to launch them, but not a G, staying back to cover the place with jamming.


Well that makes sense for the Armée de l'Air and Aviation Navale since they have a much smaller fleet than the USAF, USN and USMC all combined.

we don't even still have a carrier full of rafale ...
only half the number at this time ....

[TLAM Strike]

You are incorrect the Growler can carry two AGM-88 HARM missiles in addition to two AIM-120 AMRAAMs, 3 ALQ-99 jamming pods and two drop tanks.


Sure he won't be unarmed
the FA18 is really a fighter bomber, with a huge loadout
But you can imagine how the lost of the growler could be a real problem to the whole aerian group escorted : no more area jamming
So his first role is not to hunt SAM (there is only few growlers compared to FA18E/F fleet), but he can carry HARM for self protection.
In the simulation FA18E of jane's, you have 3 different targeting mode. One of them consist to give immediate priority to HARM, because a lock from a SAM was detected. If you have selected this, then you just have to press the release button to engage the threat and move away.
This should be probably the only fonction the growler will use.
If US army wants to destroy SAM with harm, they will send FA18 E/F to launch them, but not a G, staying back to cover the place with jamming. I don't really see the problem with this as this is what the USN has been doing with EA-6B since Vietnam. In Vietnam it was EA-6Bs and USAF birds providing standoff jamming while Iron Hand flying the A-4s, A-6s, and A-7s killed the SAMs with Shrikes/Standards and cluster bombs. In Libya same thing only a few F/A-18s were there too. Gulf War I same thing.


Well that makes sense for the Armée de l'Air and Aviation Navale since they have a much smaller fleet than the USAF, USN and USMC all combined.

we don't even still have a carrier full of rafale ...
only half the number at this time .... Should have kept the F-8 Crusader. The 'MiG Master' is a damn fine jet. ;)

[Ula Jolly]

This thread just proves what hardly needs to be proved, that Kilo commanders are the most devoted and bravest of all submarine commanders. :smug: Yuepp!
We go out there and we don't expect to be coming home - when a soldier knows he's going to die, he will perform beyond his best with his fellow tubmates!
Anti-sonar coatings? That's for PUSSIES I tell you! It'll just soften the impact when we, after having thrown the torpedoes and the forks at the Nimitz, set for ramming speed!:arrgh!:

[TLAM Strike]

This thread just proves what hardly needs to be proved, that Kilo commanders are the most devoted and bravest of all submarine commanders. :smug: Yuepp!
We go out there and we don't expect to be coming home - when a soldier knows he's going to die, he will perform beyond his best with his fellow tubmates!
Anti-sonar coatings? That's for PUSSIES I tell you! It'll just soften the impact when we, after having thrown the torpedoes and the forks at the Nimitz, set for ramming speed!:arrgh!:

Speak for your self I got out there and I come back.:|\\

[Ula Jolly]

On a more serious note, if you place the Kilo in Argentinian or Norwegian littoral waters in a defensive position, she WILL mess up your fleet, as was seen on Joint Winter '04 IIRC. *COUGH HMS Invincible and half the landing fleet to the bottom because of one di/el sub /COUGH*
Probably the proudest moment in the Norwegian subfleet's history. :arrgh!:
http://www.mil.no/multimedia/archive/00038/1_Periskop_38177a.jpgPhoto courtesy of www.mil.no (http://www.mil.no)

[Kurushio]

On a more serious note, if you place the Kilo in Argentinian or Norwegian littoral waters in a defensive position, she WILL mess up your fleet, as was seen on Joint Winter '04 IIRC. *COUGH HMS Invincible and half the landing fleet to the bottom because of one di/el sub /COUGH*
Probably the proudest moment in the Norwegian subfleet's history. :arrgh!:
http://www.mil.no/multimedia/archive/00038/1_Periskop_38177a.jpgPhoto courtesy of www.mil.no (http://www.mil.no)
HMS "Invincible" is a misnomer. It's a blimming dwarf carrier...

"oh look...it's HMS Invincible" *pause* *laughter*. Bwahahaha! :rotfl:

Actually, there's a Clancy novel where the Soviets laugh at HMS Invincible...was it Red Storm Rising? :hmm:

[LoBlo]

HMS "Invincible" is a misnomer. It's a blimming dwarf carrier...

"oh look...it's HMS Invincible" *pause* *laughter*. Bwahahaha! :rotfl:

Actually, there's a Clancy novel where the Soviets laugh at HMS Invincible...was it Red Storm Rising? :hmm:

:yep: yep, that's one of the reasons why I hate British ship names...might as well name them names like the HMS "I so Awesome" or the HMS "I'm so Great" :lol: Ship names should have meaning, pride, but never haughtyness IMHO

[TLAM Strike]

Actually, there's a Clancy novel where the Soviets laugh at HMS Invincible...was it Red Storm Rising? :hmm: Umm no. It was THFRO and I think Ramius was complenting the ships name.

[Kurushio]

Umm no. It was THFRO and I think Ramius was complenting the ships name.

You were right, it was THFRO, though you are wrong when you say Ramius compliments the ship's name.

'Periscope,' Ramius said calmly. The oiled metal tube hissed upward on hydraulic pressure. The captain handed his cap to the junior officer of the watch as he bent to look into the eyepiece. 'So, we have three imperialist ships. HMS Invincible. Such a name for a ship! He scoffed for his audience.

I don't think scoffing can be considered a compliment. :lol:

P.S. Took less than 2 minutes to find that paragraph. HFRO is superbly laid out...read it and you'll see what I mean.

[TLAM Strike]

You were right, it was THFRO, though you are wrong when you say Ramius compliments the ship's name.

'Periscope,' Ramius said calmly. The oiled metal tube hissed upward on hydraulic pressure. The captain handed his cap to the junior officer of the watch as he bent to look into the eyepiece. 'So, we have three imperialist ships. HMS Invincible. Such a name for a ship! He scoffed for his audience.

I don't think scoffing can be considered a compliment. :lol:

P.S. Took less than 2 minutes to find that paragraph. HFRO is superbly laid out...read it and you'll see what I mean.
I forgot the scoffing part. I just remembed "Such a name for a ship!"

And yes I have read it about 4 times.

[Kurushio]

I forgot the scoffing part. I just remembed "Such a name for a ship!"

And yes I have read it about 4 times.

I've read it 3 times. So easy to read...the words flow. Clancy lost the ability to do that later on. To be honest and for your defence (and the reason why you probably didn't remember it as an insult on his part), is because the quote I gave you is slightly out of context.
Because...at the time he scofs at the name, Ramius is trying not to give the game away that he's defecting...thus he's trying to put on a show for the ones who aren't involved and give them the impression he still hates the west. So it's a fake scoff. :lol: So let's say it's 50/50 on who's right or wrong. :yep:

[MaHuJa]

Clancy lost the ability to do that later on.

Perhaps when he stopped writing his own books... :-?

Though at least I doubt they're as rich on factual errors as Dan Browns books.

I don't read either, though; Nowadays I'm reading "The design and evolution of c++" :|\\
Or the wheel of time. Neither of which has anything at all to do with submarines.

[TLAM Strike]

Perhaps when he stopped writing his own books... :-? Or perhaps when Larry Bond stoped writting them for him. :hmm:

[Kurushio]

Perhaps when he stopped writing his own books... :-?

Though at least I doubt they're as rich on factual errors as Dan Browns books.

I don't read either, though; Nowadays I'm reading "The design and evolution of c++" :|\\
Or the wheel of time. Neither of which has anything at all to do with submarines.
Yes, that too. Though I meant from The Sum of all Fears onwards. Without Remorse was a major disappointment...crime fiction Clancy? WTF was that? And there I was right up to the last chapter waiting for this Vietnam covert mission to take off (WARNING!!!! SPOILER AHEAD) ......................................woops aborted. By the way...did he take the plot from Rambo 2? Because it's very similar. Anyway...then after that he did Debt of Honour which you can skip the first 400 pages (can you say BLOATWARE???...I mean, do we really need a laymans description on how a theoretical collapse of the international stock markets could take place..oh perlease!) after that and towards the end, it does get very good though...two books in one. And the sequel is OK.

Though his critics got it right when they say his patriotism towards the end (and he plainly changes into a grumpy old-man before our eyes) makes him lose touch with reality. All of a sudden the US has become the Super Duper Power we all know only exists in Hollywood. I call it the "Independence Day Syndrome". 'We'll save the world and humanity all by ourselves'. :rotfl:

Sorry...I went off on a rant about Clancy. Didn't notice..:dead:

[Kurushio]

Or perhaps when Larry Bond stoped writting them for him. :hmm:
That's funny you should say that. Has anyone else noticed how the one he supposedly wrote with Larry Bond (Red Storm Rising) is full of typos? I presume Tom left them in to show it's a poorer work of fiction then the ones he wrote on his own. Nothing else can explain it...there are MANY errors in that book. Though Larry lost rights to that book considering he's only mentioned in one line. It also says they had a falling out....you don't say? LOL

[FERdeBOER]

WOW!! Great post! Very fun and great ideas. :rock: :rock:

Is incredible how the question has derived to speak about planes, air warfare, religion...

About praying... first, I'm sure an Iman could interpretate the Coran someway to say: "If pray makes your people die, your are free to not pray."
And also don't forget that dying fighting against the enemy makes you go to heaven, so I think they are free to not pray on patrol if it implies a risk.
Christians and Jewish also interpretate their sacred writtings, all do that for their beneffit.
Second... they can pray in turns, don't they? If they rotate for duties, I think some of them can pray while others work, and then change the sides.
And if all of this is forbbiden and they have to pray all toghether at the same time even if they are evading an incomming torpedo, I'm sure they will not pray.

About ship names... if you want to joke, you can do it with any name, no need to be "Invincible" or something like that, but I think names are important, but that importance has two sides, you will be very proud to serve on the Invincible, but if she's sunk... the morale of the enemy will grow equal than yours decrease, because it was "The Invincible".
None of this happens if you call it "HMS (or USS) Guinea Pig :rotfl: (my respect for all guinea pigs).

[TLAM Strike]

That's funny you should say that. Has anyone else noticed how the one he supposedly wrote with Larry Bond (Red Storm Rising) is full of typos? I presume Tom left them in to show it's a poorer work of fiction then the ones he wrote on his own. Nothing else can explain it...there are MANY errors in that book. Though Larry lost rights to that book considering he's only mentioned in one line. It also says they had a falling out....you don't say? LOL I only noticed one or two typos, maybe my book is a newer print. Most around here consider RSR to be one of Clancy's best books and Bond's Dangerous Ground to be one of the best sub books ever so if he was trying to ruin Bond with poor spelling I think he failed.


Second... they can pray in turns, don't they? If they rotate for duties, I think some of them can pray while others work, and then change the sides. I think have specific times to pray each day. Really anoying considering they are sleeping on 2 or 3 shift rotations.

"Hay Saeed wake up for Prayers!"
"Manyuok Amir I just got off a 6 hour Port/Starbord shift."

[Kurushio]

TLAM...the reason I mention the typos, is because there are very very few in any of his other books, including the one written (or at least distributed) before, namely HFRO. I also have one of the last prints made (they stopped reprinting after the 20th time, I think), yet found at least 50 typos, if not more. It was really beginning to put me off...I'm a stickler for that sort of thing.

Though does everyone here remember Red Storm Rising? I've read it twice (which I'm proud of considering it's over 800 pages long). A large chunk of the book is set on Iceland, with that marine helping the girl whos parents get shot by the Soviets, remember? A lot of it was also about the land battle in Germany and the political battle with the evil KGB head who blows up the kiddies visiting the Kremlin. Maybe people forget...but...the vast majority of the book isn't about naval battles.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Though his critics got it right when they say his patriotism towards the end (and he plainly changes into a grumpy old-man before our eyes) makes him lose touch with reality. All of a sudden the US has become the Super Duper Power we all know only exists in Hollywood. I call it the "Independence Day Syndrome". 'We'll save the world and humanity all by ourselves'. :rotfl:

Sorry...I went off on a rant about Clancy. Didn't notice..:dead:

Actually, I think he just submerged it a bit better before. Gulf War 91 gave him all the reason he needed to drop all caution and turn the US into the Martians.

Though does everyone here remember Red Storm Rising? I've read it twice (which I'm proud of considering it's over 800 pages long). A large chunk of the book is set on Iceland, with that marine helping the girl whos parents get shot by the Soviets, remember? A lot of it was also about the land battle in Germany and the political battle with the evil KGB head who blows up the kiddies visiting the Kremlin. Maybe people forget...but...the vast majority of the book isn't about naval battles.

I've read it forty times, minimum. Over the years and re-reading, I became more critical. And it wasn't a Marine. It was a USAF Lt, who managed to bump into some Marines before bugging out of Keflavik.

[Kurushio]

Absolutely right Kazuaki, on both accounts. I noticed I made a mistake later but didn't bother editing...they called him a "wing-wiper" or something along those lines if I remember correctly (got the book somewhere else, so can't check).

[Jamie]

These Kilos are the only thing in Iran's arsenal that make me sweat. But I don't think they're nothing the USN couldn't handle. :ping:

Camie Jarlson, eh? .... Cute. :roll: