Quote:

while i admire your research, you're just corroborating that we've got a number of submarines, none of which being listed as "boomers" in the gulf. i already said that was the case.
ohios are boomers, LA's are the kid's size. the former is meant primarily to launch lots of missiles from long-range without the burden of engaging coastal aircraft, other subs, etc. LA's are the smaller submarines with the ability to fuck other subs and ships up as well as launch a bunch of missiles. i said small=in gulf, big=outside, the articles confirm it with no mention of "boomers". when we've launched missiles from them at the middle-east it's easier to do it from outside gulf waters and they're on a long-leash given the range of their missiles. again:i said, attack subs-in gulf, ohios as silos away from the action. you said: i'm going to research stuff that agrees with james then try to form an argument from it.

you said: collisions were frequent and an inherent problem with submarining shallow waters in wartime. you'd be wrong, there are tons of first-time crew going out there yearly and we've had no damaged subs, just some dead japanese fishermen in the way of stuff you DON"T DO in hostile waters, like decide to breach for the fuck of it. the subs in the gulf are staying down and as undetectable as possible in combat and either engaging or avoiding other vessels as hostile.

two minor scrapes screwing around during months at sea in peacetime in a decade with smaller submarines really says there ISN'T an issue with vulnerability to collision.

the serious submarine accidents of the last decade or so, as i said in my prior post don't include us, russia's got impressive designs and duct-tape for upkeep and everyone else has stuff technologically-comprable to the 60's-era subs. ours were bored kids drilling without paying attention and hot-dogging, that doesn't happen in war and the subs aren't coming up much.







Alright, I think you might have got me on "boomers". IIRC they referred to LA Class as boomers on National Geographic. More like whooshers than boomers. Terminology error.

I thought you meant subs in general when you said boomers because of the national geographic reference, even LA Class as still pretty big when you think they are operating in 180 feet of water. So I think you'll still agree with me that no Admiral would take out a battle group without at least one sub, even if its in the gulf.


I said collisions were more frequent than you might think. And IIRC correctly I said a real danger in the gulf, now unless you are a captain of an LA class submarine I will take the word over of a captain/s of LA class submarines. Which is what they've always said. They don't like running shallow in the gulf. Its dangerous.


http://www.prop1.org/2000/accident/1989/890712a1.htm

42 since 1983. The reports, obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests, are "not necessarily inclusive," a Navy spokesman said.

So that's the one's they have to admit to. You will notice mostly they involve civilian vessels. So who knows how many civilian ones go unreported, how many involving two or military vessels go unreported, and how many involving one submarine go unreported.


I read somewhere too in the old days, and even now, of US subs travelling in the baffles of other subs etc there were a number of collisions and near misses. Without wishing to again sound too conspiracy theorist, do you really think the US Navy is going to go out of its way to report incidencts it doesn't have to when it involves billion dollars of radioactive material packed hiroshima dwarfing submarine?


http://cns.miis.edu/pubs/reports/kursknyt.htm
As recently as March 1998, two American nuclear submarines collided in an exercise off the coast of Long Island.


http://everything2.com/?node_id=944314



Now don't go all semantic on me and say "But yeah, in such and such amount of years and with such and such hours of operational deployment yada yada."

Semantics = you say potatoe, I say potahto.



And given SSGNs could operate in otherwise denied areas to provide unique capabilities that would enable other U.S. forces. These capabilities include cruise missiles that can be launched at rapid rates, 66 Special Operations Forces (SOF) personnel, a swimmer lock out shelter, and an Advanced SEAL Delivery System (ASDS). I'm still not totally convinced they're not used in the gulf, now or in the past.

I mean why put seal teams etc on a boat that is going to stay a million miles away from the field of operation? Are they going to swim or walk all the way?

Why not outfit another class of subs etc exclusively?

Seems a bit illogical as I say to bother putting special forces on a sub that is never going to go anywhere near a coast etc.


I think Ohio Class being pretty much a nuclear final solution platform are still pretty hush-hush. I wouldn't want the Russians etc to know where my mobile missile silo was.
_________________________
Can someone reactivate me please. I vote my deactivation as the lamest ever. You know its right. Do it, do it do it.