We attack Nato on tuesday with our new subs

[bookworm_020]

Originally Posted by Chock

This sort of thing has been happening since before WW1:

In 1904, an A Class submarine commanded by Reginald Bacon did exactly this. Umpires of a naval exercise that year determined that Bacon's 1st Flotilla had sunk two battleships (they claimed they had sunk more). CIC of the Home Fleet, Sir Arthur Kynvet Wilson (who had been a real enemy of submarine development) was naturally infuriated by this.

When, during the exercise, a submarine signalled his ship with 'Respectfully submit have torpedoed you. Respectfully submit you are sunk. Respectfully submit you are out of the exercise.' apparently Kynvet Wilson grabbed the semaphore flags from his signaller and sent 'You be damned' with them personally.

Chock

Not a bad effot considering the crews had very little experience with the craft at this point in time, almost no training in how to do a setup of torpedo angles and attack methods! For a couple of sub commanders it was their first time out!

[Von Tonner]

Can you believe it?!!! One sub sank the entire force - truly a remarkable achievement.

"A lone South African submarine left some Nato commanders with red faces on Tuesday as it "sank" all the ships of the Nato Maritime Group engaged in exercises with the South African Navy off the Cape coast."



Read all about it here.

http://www.mg.co.za/articlepage.aspx...5&referrer=RSS

[Skybird]

Congrats, though I am not surprised. I think since long that the future of real maritime warfare (not just ELINT, special ops, strategic-political intimidation etc.) is not mighty carriers groups and ships and ASW units, but submarines. If you can't neutralize the enemy sub threat, you already have lost the naval war. Lesson valid since WWII.

[Von Tonner]

After this performance by our sub I would totally agree with you Skybird. Previously when our Navy wanted the money to buy these new subs I was vocally opposed, thinking the money would be better spent on surface vessels to patrol our vast coast line and in so doing protect our marine resources.

But these subs have proved effective there as well, having chased down a trawler heading back East loaded with poached Abalone.

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by Von Tonner

Can you believe it?!!! One sub sank the entire force - truly a remarkable achievement.

"A lone South African submarine left some Nato commanders with red faces on Tuesday as it "sank" all the ships of the Nato Maritime Group engaged in exercises with the South African Navy off the Cape coast."



Read all about it here.

http://www.mg.co.za/articlepage.aspx...5&referrer=RSS

Very interesting. Exactly what surface ships were there ? :hmm:

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Dan D

http://www.abendblatt.de/daten/2007/08/08/779801.html

That article says the 212A is "fully combat-operational" at depths of only 20 m, even 14 m - and manouvering with full speed.

At the tower, these boats are 11.5 meters high. Gives you 3.5 meters margin. Max speed when submerged is (officially) 20 kn.

the article reminds of the Argentinian "San Lousis", a german type 209, which fired a volley of eight torpedoes at HMS Invincible and escorts during the Falkland war. Not one torpedoe hit - it illustrates that if crew training is poor, technology not always compensates for that: the technicians had linked the wires for torpeoe control in a wrong way, thus after being shot the eels could not be controlled anymore. Luck for the British - the sinking of the Invincible would have meant (according to the British admiral, Sandy Woodward) the defeat of the British and their immediate retreat.

What alarms me is that the article finally say that Pakistan wants to get those 212s. Didn't knew that. I hope nobody in Berlin acts foolishly. You don't sell your primary weapons to your most serious enemies.

[Von Tonner]

Here is a nice pic of the group with Table Mountain as a backdrop

http://www.flightzone.co.za/media/ph...nato_group.jpg






http://navy.org.za/articles/2007/09/...rfare-exercise



From the article:

"Another sign of the increasing importance of a security operation in African waters comes from the US Navy, which plans from 2008 to have a "big-deck" presence in the Gulf of Guinea.
"My aspiration is to have a ship there 365 days a year," said Admiral Harry Ulrich, commander of US Naval Forces Europe and Africa.
The South African Navy has long held the position that its new fleet would be used for anti-piracy and anti-poaching operations.
The training with Nato is its first big joint operation to discover how this might be carried out."

Extract from above article which goes some way in explaining the interest of Nato and in particlular the USA interest. By "big-deck" I am presuming US Admiral Ulrich is alluding to a carrier. Would love to see these little subs go up against one of those. Even if they got through the defense I doubt they have the fire-power to take one out though.

[Von Tonner]

http://navy.org.za/articles/2007/09/...es-world-first

Hell, we obviously think they are so good we are insuring them. The first subs ever to be insured.

[Von Tonner]

Originally Posted by jimbuna

Very interesting. Exactly what surface ships were there ? :hmm:

Visit this site. It gives the ships but what will knock your socks off are the stunning action pics that were taken. Makes you wish that you were there. Truly amazing pictorial coverage. Love the one pic where all ships are under way in formation trying to protect the main asset - but to no avail.

http://www.navy.mil.za/

[Jimbuna]

Your right....the photos are great But hey!!....where were the professionals (Royal Navy) ?

[AntEater]

:hmm::rotfl:
SAN Maritime patrol aircraft...

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by AntEater

:hmm::rotfl:
SAN Maritime patrol aircraft...

Is that an old DC-3? How dare they! An MPA built out of the airframe of a passanger aircraft will never work!! Oh wait...

[Chock]

That's the considerably more capable, updated 'turboprop' conversion of the venerable old DC-3, the original radial engines having been replaced and the airframe upgraded. a good aircraft and like the original, tough as old boots.

Chock

[bookworm_020]

Originally Posted by Chock

That's the considerably more capable, updated 'turboprop' conversion of the venerable old DC-3, the original radial engines having been replaced and the airframe upgraded. a good aircraft and like the original, tough as old boots.

Chock

The Gooney Bird will still be flying long after I'm dead! It flies and flies, and never dies!

[JALU3]

Originally Posted by bookworm_020

The Gooney Bird will still be flying long after I'm dead! It flies and flies, and never dies!

As they say . . . if it aint broke . . .

Well as I have written before, if anyone has seen the ASW school here in San Diego on Harbor Blvd, there is not as much activity there as there was in the past. Since the end of the Cold War we have let our capabilities languish . . . look at what happend to the S-3. If anything a SV-22 should be developed, or some other aircraft to supplement where the MMA cannot travel