Pics of the USS Conneticut (Seawolf) having an Arctic holiday

[Kapitan]

Yup best tell that to the USN and RN and French navy.

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Kapitan

Yup best tell that to the USN and RN and French navy.

Doesn't sound like the USN was the one in need of an upgrade.

[Kapitan]

The USN ASW ships need a big upgrade, the perry FFG for example is totaly useless in defence of itself.

The USN are no way masters of submarine warfare, if they were then why does the USN insist that its officers are sent on the BRITISH training scheme?

The seawolf for cost and power yeah is expencive but the papa when built cost just under what the seawolf does today.

The gotland was in open ocean when on training exercises it also does littoral exercises its basicaly just to get the USN up to speed with ASW

And again if the USN are masters in ASW why would they lease a forign submarine for a whole year and more ? (note they got thier arses kicked quite a few times)

The USN although has good platforms also has some realy bad ones and some well stone age ones.

In neptune warrior the seawolf was killed 4 times within 36 hours by a german submarine, this year they have forced the germans to put noise makers on thier subs because they are just too quiet.


The Seawolf is a excellent platform but the seawolf herself is now nearing 10 years old, the traffies are a good 15 or more, the astute are thee equivelent to the virginia.

During the exercises i dont think any sub acctualy need alot of speed, so i doubt it would be going that fast and i also doubt it had any noise makers on it at all.

Seawolf has 8 21 inch torpedo tubes for comparision the akula has 14 torpedo tubes also has AASROC missiles if you mean engine power then yeh seawolf will win also i think on the speed catagory too seawolf is a 37 knotter the akula only 35knots.

The seawolf is an excellent submarine its got everything any submarineer ever dreams of and yes it is one of thee best subs in the world.

Did you know that BAe and some other british companies acctualy make parts for US submarines? including parts for SONAR systems ?

[HunterICX]

:hmm: and the fight goes on between Russia and America submarines.

btw...that polarbear...isnt that an russian spy :rotfl: dressed in an bear costume.

[sonar732]

Ok Kapitan. I know that you are a youngin' that's "wet behind the ears" and that's why I've enjoyed watching the arguements you've presented. However, when it comes to smashin' our sonar systems I couldn't stand back.

A few points regarding your claims. It's no secret as to why we lease other countries diesel electric boats. We don't have any diesel electrics and they are being produced by countries that pose a threat to the United States, ie...NPKR, China, and Iran. It's not because our training sucks, par from the course, it's because we don't have something like it to compete against in training excercises. Yes, the Seawolf and Virginia classes are quiet...but not that quiet. We also leased the services of the Australian Collins class who gave us an opportunity to have OPFOR excercises.

Here you are trashing how our sonar people can't find a diesel electric submarine, yet I remember standing watch transiting out of the Straight of Juan de Fuca seeing Russian trawlers shadowing my boat. Why might you ask? Because once my boat went to sea, the Russian submarines that were waiting for us couldn't find us and we are a nuc...not a diesel. What's their excuse...training or equipment?

As for saying that BAE makes our sonar equipment??? Lockhead Martin and Northrup Grumman are the primary suppliers of our sonar systems. Yea, BAE might make a chip or two..doubt it, but the primary suppliers are whom I mentioned.

Take your book-smart's along with your "contacts" and keep them at home. There's nothin' like a "been there, done that"!

[Kapitan]

I will openly admit that the russian sonar systems on the submarines even todays ones are well quite antiquated but they are trying to step up with the newer waterfall displays.

BAe makes some of the parts not the entire system of sonar for the seawolf and viginia just like it does with the exocet and other products.

Im not climing that the USN training is crap because its a good navy however do think they should commission in at least a dozen SSK's so they dont have to lease any forign submarines, of corse australia and sweden would oblige they are paid enough to do so and they are allies.

As for sonar systems apart from BAe makes some part's thats about as much as i know i cant operate them i cant use them.

Yeah im young and wet behind the ears but theres nothing like learning something new every day.

Oh and why the russian trail you on the surface? simple cause thier own SSN's are useless for open ocean tracking i think even the akula would struggle to keep tabs on the ohio.

[sonar732]

Originally Posted by Kapitan

I will openly admit that the russian sonar systems on the submarines even todays ones are well quite antiquated but they are trying to step up with the newer waterfall displays.

BAe makes some of the parts not the entire system of sonar for the seawolf and viginia just like it does with the exocet and other products.

Im not climing that the USN training is crap because its a good navy however do think they should commission in at least a dozen SSK's so they dont have to lease any forign submarines, of corse australia and sweden would oblige they are paid enough to do so and they are allies.

As for sonar systems apart from BAe makes some part's thats about as much as i know i cant operate them i cant use them.

Yeah im young and wet behind the ears but theres nothing like learning something new every day.

Oh and why the russian trail you on the surface? simple cause thier own SSN's are useless for open ocean tracking i think even the akula would struggle to keep tabs on the ohio.

The U.S. Navy will never imploy a SSK. There is simply no need for it in our mission profile. We just decomm'd our greatest SSK, Dolphin, due to it going beyond it's "shelf-life" and mission. Your comment regarding BAE and our sonar was pressed as an insult, not "learning something new". The whole scheme of your post has been insulting to the U.S. ASW community as a matter of fact. All you could do is provide "proof" as to how bad our crews are and not the whole reasoning of why we are even doing the excercises...hence the first paragraph in my post. I might suggest you do the unbias research before commenting. Hence "wet behind the ears" comment by me.

The Perry FFG comment for instance...did you know why they were produced? They were produced cheaply and in great numbers for the escort of multiple convoys across the Atlantic and support of multiple battle groups, whether amphib or carrier. They were pre-Aegis and replaces the aging Knox class. If you place a side by side comparison, it's a step up as the Knox class barely had any weapons capability.