Interesting. But I think the authors own bias comes through with the repeated assertions that nuc subs can’t operate effectively in ‘shallow waters’.
We’ve been doing that very effectively for half a century in the Med, for just one glaring example of the author’s bias.
Author bias or not, diesel-electric subs have worried the Navy for some time. See attached.
http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/issues/2004/Aug/Diesel_Submarines.htm
>>But I think the authors own bias comes through with the repeated assertions that nuc subs can’t operate effectively in ‘shallow waters’.
>>We’ve been doing that very effectively for half a century in the Med, for just one glaring example of the author’s bias.
For a slightly higher-risk example, the Sea of Okhotsk comes to mind.
Yes. Some of the article may be correct but, all in all it’s not very credible sounding.
So, let me see here. The med sea, which is don’t know how many cubits wide and how many deep, but a bunch of them, can easily hide a deisel sub because of the size, but larger nuclear sub is easy to locate?? I seriously question the relative ease with which nuclear subs are located in the med sea, and not the deisel counterpart.
I was thinking the same thing. Does the author know of the Virginia or the latest mods to 688 boats?