Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: zog
--the militry doesn't have a way to control a missile from another asset overhead? Like, couldn't a missile be launched, then it's targeting be accomplished from a very high flying drone aircraft, or satellite or awacs or surface ship elsewhere's?

The problem is that the submarine would have to come up on Link 16 to both receive a basic tactical picture (the problem is that the SUBMARINE wouldn't have sufficient siutational awareness without external cueing) AND report their overall tactical situation. People tend to get a wee bit suspicious when they detect datalink signals coming from an otherwise empty patch of ocean. Once again, this idea compromises the sub's stealth.

Most proposals I have seen for SUBSAMs involve a mast-mounted box launcher, loaded with Stinger. There was a SIAM (Self-Initiating Antiaircraft Missile) project in the late 1970s; this would have used acoustic sensors to detect overhead patrol aircraft or helicopters and could be left as a sort of "SAM Mine" to help a submarine escape.

ALL of the SUBSAM proposals have had one thing in common: the submarine community has said, in unison, "We are NOT toting those things on our boats." They have too many negatives (a submarine's only defense is stealth; these weapons tend to compromise same) and not enough positives to get Fleet "buy-in."

64 posted on 02/01/2002 4:10:50 AM PST by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]


To: Poohbah
--I tend to agree with you, just pointing out it's not completely impossible. I realise subs basic defense is to *not* be there all the time, we'll accept that as a common sense given. Personally, I don't think any of the regular naval units were involved, I think they were just in the vicinity. So far anyway. I know that's a popular theory, but I don't put it at the top of the list. With that said, I know people personally who have related stories of things they have seen go down who were "ordered" such and such never happened, they didn't see it, 'or else". I think both these observations are correct and *true*. Here's an example, my girlfriend and her crew, she's retired skygoddess-were deadheading one day, for 20 minutes they had a ...hmmm...an "aircraft" sitting right off their wings at around 200 yards. When they landed, offical but un-identified dudes walked the cockpit crew into a room, ten minutes later, they come out with these other unidentified guys, the captain tell the rest of the cabin crew they "didn't" see what they saw, "or else". This was an 'advisory" that was designed to basically coerce them into shutting up about it right then. shes' still scared of these guys, BTW..... I've met the captain, he's retired now as well, and he's still steamed about it, but wasn't in any rush to mess up his check, if ya get my drift. None of the crew was in any rush to mess up their checks, although anecdotally a few sentences get spoken. Quite the story really...... I'd bet a nickle that's not the only time this sort of thing has happened with the airline industry, or the military either.

Total aside, what's the ID of the aerial asset reported at the time at around 80,000 feet? Do you know? No, don't have that discussion link handy, but I read it here on this site, someone else might have it. I'm just interested in anything that can maintain that sort of altitude, that would have been used in a non-exercise exercise.

68 posted on 02/01/2002 5:21:30 AM PST by zog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson