Russian subs off the eastern coast of US

S400

New Member
According to this article the Russians have a couple modern attack subs parked off the eastern coast of the US.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/05/world/05patrol.html?_r=1

Is this simply military posturing to try and prove they are still a military player, or do you think this could portend some 'event.'

Recall Biden's 'manufactured crisis' prediction shortly before the US elections.

This seems to be a very unusual event to me. This is my first thread posted, and I look forward to any opinions offered.
 

StevoJH

The Bunker Group
As long as they stay more then 12 Nautical Miles off the coast they can do anything they want. They aren't breaking any laws or anything.
 

S400

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #3
I agree

As long as they stay more then 12 Nautical Miles off the coast they can do anything they want. They aren't breaking any laws or anything.
I agree completely. I just thought it was an interesting event since it has been quite some time since this type of deployment was standard fare.

It seems an unlikely event given the current economic situation.
 

Marc 1

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
Maybe not quite so unlikely, IIRC the Russians have restarted their maritime Tu-95 patrols in recent years too. It's all part of Putin's desire to return Russia to being as militarily powerful as it was during the cold war.
 

tphuang

Super Moderator
question is why they made this so public? Other than for political reasons, there really isn't any point in telling the other side that you can follow them where ever they go.
 

Marc 1

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
question is why they made this so public? Other than for political reasons, .
I reckon you got it right there - It lets the rest of the world know that Russia is back in the main game (even if it is only a fascade). Bears doing maritime patrols can been seen, tracked, intercepted and photographed - the subs may even have been told to make noise - let the world know. Different matter if these were missile boats.
 

Falstaff

New Member
I reckon you got it right there - It lets the rest of the world know that Russia is back in the main game (even if it is only a fascade). Bears doing maritime patrols can been seen, tracked, intercepted and photographed - the subs may even have been told to make noise - let the world know. Different matter if these were missile boats.
Uh, I don't know. Might be the other way round. American officials stated very clearly that they could track these subs with ease, even though one of the two was an improved, quieter Akula class. When I'm trying to read between the lines I think there is more of a message from the US, saying hey guys, roam as you wish, but know that we can find you anytime.
The mesage that Russia might want to send is that despite the embarrassing Bulava-failures they're still there- however I think that's a message to the Russian people, less to the rest of the world. Just my opinion.
 

Firn

Active Member
I guess that the sources from that article are within US entities. Perhaps the Russian Navy wanted to state "privately" that they are still in game, perhaps only to assure the political leadership which ordered it that they are still capable of something like that. All the failures recently must have been embarrassing for both the officials and the Russian pride. So the intention was perhaps directed at the own entities more than at the US military and goverment.
 

SkolZkiy

New Member
question is why they made this so public? Other than for political reasons, there really isn't any point in telling the other side that you can follow them where ever they go.
Why our guys made it so public?? May be we must ask question why somebody in Pentagon told this to journalist??
 

SkolZkiy

New Member
Russian subs were in oceans in 90-s and during last 5-6 years more often then in most bad times. This fact means NOTHING.
More then this how do you know that there were two Akulla's?? Where did you get that?
Even some US officials could not say where exactly sub moved after that moment - one said South another said North.
Don't you remember how in the end of 80's 4!!! sub with SLBM were lost by US NAVY in the middle of Atlantic ocean?? Or may be you even haven't heard about this.

I think just NYT needed something to post and say "Look those Russians again try to threaten us".

And don't forget that US sub appear near our territorial waters also enough often and sometimes not near but IN our waters.
 

Falstaff

New Member
please give me a link - I've read English sources but didn't see that
What about the first source that S400 provided? I quote:

[...]The submarines are of the Akula class, a counterpart to the Los Angeles class attack subs of the United States Navy, and not one of the larger submarines that can launch intercontinental nuclear missiles

[...]One of the submarines is the newer Akula II, officials said, which is quieter than the older variant and the most advanced in the Russian fleet.
 

Marc 1

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
Uh, I don't know. Might be the other way round. American officials stated very clearly that they could track these subs with ease, even though one of the two was an improved, quieter Akula class. When I'm trying to read between the lines I think there is more of a message from the US, saying hey guys, roam as you wish, but know that we can find you anytime.
Possible.

The mesage that Russia might want to send is that despite the embarrassing Bulava-failures they're still there- however I think that's a message to the Russian people, less to the rest of the world. Just my opinion.
If it were for domestic consumption - why let the americans blow the whistle? I suppose they may have been planning footage of the subs returning to base - and then announcing that they had been sitting off the coast of the US. If so, their idea backfired.
 
Top