Go Back   DefenceTalk Forum - Military & Defense Forums > Global Defense & Military > Navy & Maritime

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures




Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence








Submarine news

This is a discussion on Submarine news within the Navy & Maritime forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Originally Posted by gf0012-aust yep, the fundamental CONOPs for both types are inherently different - outside of the need to ...


Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old February 6th, 2017   #301
Defense Professional / Analyst
General
No Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,393
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by gf0012-aust View Post
yep, the fundamental CONOPs for both types are inherently different - outside of the need to universally run silent, run deep, make life hard for red team once they clear safe harbour.

that doesn't mean that a virginia with a different weapons package wouldn't be able to behave differently.

but its a different training and fighting paradigm if thats the case
The first boomers were Skipjacks with a missile section, actually the Resolutions were too, Valiant (Churchills?) with a missile plug. The flipside is the Astutes apparently have a fair bit of Vanguard DNA.
Volkodav is offline  
Old February 7th, 2017   #302
Defense Aficionado
Major General
John Fedup's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,102
Threads:
I believe the Virginia budget currently allows for 48 boats, a number some claim is too small. The minimum Columbia budget is 100 billion which should allow another 25-30 addtional Virginias with VPM, maybe more if production costs are lessened by an increased build number. There would likely be money left over for training addtional crews for boomer operations.
John Fedup is offline  
Old February 7th, 2017   #303
Defense Enthusiast
Corporal
Tsavo Lion's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Arizona
Posts: 192
Threads:
Welcome to America’s ‘Nuclear Sponge’
I agree with the author, he points out the risks & costs of having stationary ICBMs. I would also add that China & N.Korea could also hit those but wouldn't unless we attack them 1st, or if they think we did or in the process of doing so. OTH, the ICBM & SSBN forces' costs must also include the TACAMO E-6B fleet & its components. Besides, the SSBN bases could also be attacked, killing many civilians nearby. They are big stationary targets just like the ICBMs in the article above. So, it makes even more sense to reduce the boomer fleet & convert the surplus subs to SSGNs. I would like to be proven wrong by someone who knows more, so please, enlighten me!
Tsavo Lion is offline  
Old February 8th, 2017   #304
Defense Professional / Analyst
General
No Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,393
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tsavo Lion View Post
Welcome to America’s ‘Nuclear Sponge’
I agree with the author, he points out the risks & costs of having stationary ICBMs. I would also add that China & N.Korea could also hit those but wouldn't unless we attack them 1st, or if they think we did or in the process of doing so. OTH, the ICBM & SSBN forces' costs must also include the TACAMO E-6B fleet & its components. Besides, the SSBN bases could also be attacked, killing many civilians nearby. They are big stationary targets just like the ICBMs in the article above. So, it makes even more sense to reduce the boomer fleet & convert the surplus subs to SSGNs. I would like to be proven wrong by someone who knows more, so please, enlighten me!
If someone starts targeting the USs nuclear arsenal with nucs the last thing they would be worried about is civilian casualties as they will probably be targeting the seat of government and major economic centres too. You are missing the point that SSBNs are inherently survivable and likely would only ever be caught in port if they were undergoing maintenance, other wise they would be crewed and ready to go or already on patrol and invisible.

I know TEL based ICBMs are of interest to you but that doesn't mean they are actually, better, cheaper or somehow more suitable than the in service options. You say you would like to be proven wrong by someone who knows more but you have chosen not to listen to the defence pros who have discussing this with you, some of who have considerable experience in submarines, armour, distributed operation etc. I feel if someone came on here and identified themselves as a boomer commander you would say they were biased, if an army / air force ballistic missile expert told you that using TELs was logistically challenging you would probably say they weren't abreast the latest developments etc. or were weren't up to speed on what the Russians, Chinese, etc. are doing.

I get the feeling this is your pet idea and you don't want to let go, I understand this as I believe the RANs need flat decks similar to Japans, but clutching straws and telling def pros how to suck eggs is just getting the mods off side.
Volkodav is offline  
Old February 8th, 2017   #305
Defense Enthusiast
Corporal
Tsavo Lion's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Arizona
Posts: 192
Threads:
I'm not fixated on TELs, but the Russians & Chinese wouldn't be investing in them & BM trains if they were next to useless. Out of USN 14 boomers, at any given time, 4 are on their stations at sea, ~1-2 in transit to/from there, ~1-2 in exercises, with the 6-8 remaining on 2 bases in densely populated coastal GA & WA. Fat targets in a nuclear exchange! Even with just 1 there it would be worth taking it out! At least the Russian SLBMs can reach USA from their Kola & Kamchatka bases & home waters, while ours need to be in mid-ocean to reach Russia, N. Korea & China. This force is a very expensive "life insurance policy" for the American taxpayers because buying more SSBNs or putting SLBMs on Virginia Vs is a huge financial burden detrimental to more important shipbuilding programs & a poor strategic choice, respectively. 4 already + 6 more converted to SSGN is like having 30 extra SSNs in fire power- saving $Bs on building those 30 new SSNs. The bottom line: the era of MAD doctrine is over, just like the Cold War itself!
Tsavo Lion is offline  
Old February 8th, 2017   #306
Grumpy Old Man
General
gf0012-aust's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 17,993
Threads:
This post is just turning into a circus event bereft of analysis in some quarters

Closed until further notice and ongoing discussion by the Mod Team
________________
A corollary of Finagle's Law, similar to Occam's Razor, says:

"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity"
http://au.linkedin.com/pub/gary-fairlie/1/28a/2a2
http://cofda.wordpress.com/

gf a.k.a. ROBOPIMP T5C
gf0012-aust is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:19 PM.