French and British Sonar

[jasonbirder]

Sweden has had a huge amount of experience in shallow water (Baltic obviously) submarine operations during the cold war.
They agressively protected their neutrality and had numerous encounters with Soviet submarines...
Their home grown Arms industry has a tremendous reputation for innovation - look at the Viggen, the S-Tank etc.
The Grippen was the first new-generation fighter to come into service - long before Eurofighter & F22 and before even the Rafale - whilst more limited in some of its capabilities than thos planes- that is because of Swedens specific defence needs rather than their ability to produce advanced equipment.

Thats not forgetting that at one stage Britains late model Trafalger Class submarines were considered to have a quieter propulsion system than their (at the time) contemparies - the late 668 class

Whilst I wouldn't argue that across the board US systems are the most advanced in the world - its not a wise assumption to consider European products...automatically inferior...

[Linton]

Sweden wasn't just chasing Russian submarines.Some of the intruders came from the colonies."The secret war against Sweden" is a very convincing read.
The Rn guards its secrets very well but reference to some of the Janes books will fill in some detail.

Ok, but we are talking SONAR here. No...what I find annoying is that people from the ex-Soviet states, all they seem to do is try to put down the US military. They are so biased it makes it hard on the eyes...and frankly I'm bored with it. Not just here...but on literally every forum out there including a military forum where this bloke supposedly to do with Sptz would whine and cry about how Russians/Soviets were falsely portrayed as inferior blah blah blah...

...and I'm predictably seeing the same thing here. So a CVN can just about do 30 knots. US sonar is pretty much behind the rest of the world. Well you know what I say to these ex-stalinists who've come out from behind the Iron Curtain? I say: if the US defeated you with such crappy weapons/systems...what does that say about Soviet/Eastern Bloc equipment?

Now please...lets leave the chip off the shoulder.

[jasonbirder]

Bias based on nationality seemes to be a little bit of a reccuring theme I encounter on the forum of every sim I've played...
Just have a look at the Il2 Forgotten Battles forum for some classic examples...(Mustangs won the war...Focke Wulfs are undermodelled blah, blah, blah....yawn)
Unfortunately if you have a preconceived opinion (EG:US equipment is the best...or Soviet equipment is unfairly viewed as being unsophisticated or inferior) its likely you will look for evidence that supports your own point of view...

Facts are that each nation is likely to have strengths and weaknesses...

US are strong in Deep Water Sonar & Integrated Combat Systems
Soviets have proven ability in deep diving fast submarines and strong/damage resistant hulls
Many European navies have extensive experience of shallow water/high target density environments
Etc etc...

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Originally Posted by Kurushio

Ok, but we are talking SONAR here.

Sonar is actually quite similar to radar - it is a sensor, and dependent on electronics and the like.

No...what I find annoying is that people from the ex-Soviet states, all they seem to do is try to put down the US military.

Woah. So everyone that doesn't just dogmatically worship the United States is an "ex-Soviet"?
Even if they are "supporting" West European products (Amizaur, who I talked to and know he's not particularly positive on Russian products)? BTW, Amizaur claims to come from Poland, which has no great love for Russia...
Stuart Slade (a.k.a. 40-knot myth killer) is a ex-Soviet? Despite the fact he wasn't particularly positive on Russian subs (the Russian sub history pages on the old Warships1.com page is largely his work, and they weren't too positive)?

They are so biased it makes it hard on the eyes...and frankly I'm bored with it.

I find it stunning you aren't more bored with boards where everyone thinks the same thing...

Not just here...but on literally every forum out there including a military forum where this bloke supposedly to do with Sptz would whine and cry about how Russians/Soviets were falsely portrayed as inferior blah blah blah...

Now, let's be objective. There is a certain tendency to do that in the West. Consider the early depictions of the AA-11 Archer in Larry Bond's books (i.e. Red Phoenix and Vortex) - given how he described the missile, it is obvious he does not know much about it at the time, which is reasonable. But you'd notice he automatically assumes it is a far inferior weapon to the Sidewinder despite coming out years later.

...and I'm predictably seeing the same thing here. So a CVN can just about do 30 knots.

Let's start w/ you explaining to us what's so abhorrent about the idea that even an American aircraft carrier is forced to obey the laws of physics. With a HP:tonne ratio of only 3:1, even counting its large size it is moving plenty swift at 30-33 knots.

US sonar is pretty much behind the rest of the world.

Ahh, how did this conclusion come about?

Well you know what I say to these ex-stalinists who've come out from behind the Iron Curtain? I say: if the US defeated you with such crappy weapons/systems...what does that say about Soviet/Eastern Bloc equipment?

Any good "ex-stalinist" could easily point out that you were going after Third World nations.

Now please...lets leave the chip off the shoulder.

Same goes to you, Kurushio...

[FERdeBOER]

Originally Posted by Kurushio

Ok, but we are talking SONAR here. No...what I find annoying is that people from the ex-Soviet states, all they seem to do is try to put down the US military. They are so biased it makes it hard on the eyes...and frankly I'm bored with it. Not just here...but on literally every forum out there including a military forum where this bloke supposedly to do with Sptz would whine and cry about how Russians/Soviets were falsely portrayed as inferior blah blah blah...

Wow, I'm from Spain, not precisely an ex-Soviet country. Even more, we have had a dictator for 40 years supported by USA on exchage of naval bases and airports.

The believe of the all-powerfull USA tech is growed by books and films.
If you read Clancy's books (specially the last ones), the Americans are the best in all and the rest are poor countries that can't do anything by themselves.

So, the rocked that launched the Apolo missions were designed for Germans, the ICBMs also.
The Atomic bomb too.
Norwegians (is correct the spell?) are the best country about oceanography, and that includes study of underwater sound propagation, ocean salinity and temperature and so on...
A lot of scientific discoveries in America are made by European an Asian people that works for the Americas.

That's because the U.S. have the money and the will. I agree that the overall of all radar, sonar, missiles, communications, vehicles... are the best on the world. But I can't see why not that country can be better in that kind of sensor, and that other country be better in avionics...
And there's another thing: the objetive. You can not have all things on the same sensor and can not put all kind of sensors on the same ship.
As an example, the cats have great night vission and can see objets in movement with great accuracy. On exange, they have not very good periferical sight.

Same thing happens with sonar. The Americans needed a specific kind of sonar, that can receive data on determinate range and frequency becuase their doctrine and the enemy (the Soviet Union).
Maybe the Americans have the best capacity for tracking nuclear boomers, but not diesels on shallow waters because that was not the priority.

Originally Posted by Kurushio

Well you know what I say to these ex-stalinists who've come out from behind the Iron Curtain? I say: if the US defeated you with such crappy weapons/systems...what does that say about Soviet/Eastern Bloc equipment?

Amazing. What a history lesson. All of us remember that famous battle when a lone US sub defeated the entire Soviet Navy...

Sorry Fre de Boer, your post is just too over-simplified. At this point, I find Hollywood or Clancy's books more believable.

And about cats...you do realise they don't have sonar?

[Amizaur]

Originally Posted by Kurushio

No...what I find annoying is that people from the ex-Soviet states, all they seem to do is try to put down the US military.

You are walking on VERY thin ice here... Have you problems with geography, history, or both ?

Originally Posted by Amizaur

You are walking on VERY thin ice here... Have you problems with geography, history, or both ?

Biased people. Yes, I have a problem with them. Do you know one?

[Amizaur]

Originally Posted by Kurushio

Biased people. Yes, I have a problem with them. Do you know one?

I'm just answering one. Personally, I don't bother where are you from. I'm answering to your arguments. You seem to do otherwise.

Unfortunately, reading in hurry then I didn't notice this:

Well you know what I say to these ex-stalinists who've come out from behind the Iron Curtain?

Actually the thin ice you walked, already cracked.

[PeriscopeDepth]

Figured out who can pee farther yet guys?

PD

[Linton]

You might want to remember that sonar(originally asdic) and radar were both invented here in Britain

[FERdeBOER]

Originally Posted by Linton

You might want to remember that sonar(originally asdic) and radar were both invented here in Britain

Active sonar, yes. Passive... is hard to say who invented it, but Leonardo Da Vinci already described that if you introduce a tube on the water and put your ear on one side, you can hear a boat from far distance.

Wonder what Dan Brown think about it :hmm: :rotfl:

[FERdeBOER]

Originally Posted by Kurushio

And about cats...you do realise they don't have sonar?

Yes, I know they have also an excelent ear , but that will turn the topic to a "National Geographic" one

Originally Posted by FERdeBOER

Yes, I know they have also an excelent ear , but that will turn the topic to a "National Geographic" one

Cats also clean their arse with their tongue.