Superior Swedish Sub Sinks American Nuclear Subs & Aircraft Carrier, USS Reagan (Video)

YouTube ^ | 12/12/10 | Chuck Henry

[OneVike]

Ever since WWII, America has been a dominant force upon the high seas. We have become so advanced in our military technology that the Soviet Union eventually collapsed, in large part because Ronald Reagan would not back down against them. In honor of his accomplishments and great leadership, congress named the worlds largest aircraft carrier after him, the USS Ronald Reagan. Well it has been 22 years since Reagan left office, and while we have been able to hold our status as the worlds most powerful military the world has ever seen, those days could be coming to an end.

Thanks in large part to the anti military sentiment that prevails in Washington, from both sides of the isle, America is losing the war of technical advancement. What you will see in this video is a submarine from Sweden the, NemoSaltadSobrius, that cannot be detected, and even worse it has repeatedly sunk our best and most powerful naval ships in mock war games. Check out this report out of San Diego by Chuck Henry, who reports that America is attempting to figure out how to catch in before our enemies discover the secret of its elusiveness.

Follow this link to see the video about the Swedish sub that could be the end America's domination of the
high seas. The Swedish sub "NemoSaltadSobrius" beats us in ever war game we played against it.
Swedish Submarine the NemoSaltadSobrius

[Lou L]

A couple of points--what are the sensors like on this sub? I assume it has some sort of passive sonar as its primary detection, but how good are its operators? Does it have radar while on the surface? If it uses active radar at all, the US could detect it.

The nightmare scenario is that one of these shows up near one of our shorelines, and launches a missile attack against one of our cities. Still, that sub has to get close enough, which means its crew has to navigate the boat through large stretches of ocean, and then they have to successfully launch the attack. There's a lot of coordination, and a lot of logistics involved. We have other means of detecting them; e.g., satellites and aircraft; hopefully, that would be good enough to ward off an attack.

[A.A. Cunningham]

Well it has been 22 years since Reagan left office

21 years, 3 weeks, three days.

[steve8714]

How much of their military budget goes to diversity and sensitivity training?

[ballplayer]

the Chinese have already done the same thing

[Non-Sequitur]

A couple of points--what are the sensors like on this sub? I assume it has some sort of passive sonar as its primary detection, but how good are its operators? Does it have radar while on the surface? If it uses active radar at all, the US could detect it.

Sweden has a modern high-tech navy staffed with highly trained personnel. Their quality is at least as good as our own.

[dusttoyou]

Looks like Iran is going to be able to furnish one before long.

The camel-jocks will have a real tough time getting their version of Fat Boy to fly on top their 10 FOOT “worm” missle. Tootseyroll Pop.

On the Swede’s sub, does anyone remember that D/Es have to surface to run the D and recharge? In a real shootout these super-stealthy D/Es would turn into excellent fish habitats long before they got near the carrier fleet, unless some dem like nobama was writing RoEs.

[Grunthor]

You base that opinion on.....?

[Non-Sequitur]

We also have Sonobuoys, which can be dropped from aircraft

Carriers no longer have fixed wing ASW aircraft with the retirement of the S-3. Land based ASW isn't in much better shape.

[Grunthor]

“Get real. It is a totally insignificant war game. This sub will be long gone if it goes in a real fight with the US Navy.”

I used to have a football coach that would think that was the most idiotic statement he ever read. Practice to win, play to win.

[SeminoleSoldier]

Actually no, the German Panzers (Panzer III, IV (Panther) and V (Tiger)) were usually more than a match for the Shermans (our tank). The Shermans were thinly armored, and because they used gasoline had the tendency to spectacularly burn up when hit. The Shermans were nicknamed Zippos by the soldiers who crewed them.
German armor being superior, even direct hits were not always effective on Panzers. Hits to the front usually deflected. It took hits below the turret on the sides or to the rear to destroy them.
However, we produced so many more Shermans than the Germans Panzers, German armor was often overwhelmed. However, it was air supremacy that usually crippled the effectiveness of German armor units.
IMO, the best tank of WWII was the T-34, it was highly mobile, armored, heavily armed, and simple enough to mass produce. In fact, the Germans gave serious thought to simply copying it.

[PUGACHEV]

I once read a book written by a young WWII lieutenant whose job was to recover and restore damaged Sherman tanks. He had no qualms about calling the Sherman an almost criminally inferior tank. The shell holes in the recovered tanks were often so small that they could be quickly plug welded, but that was the easiest part of the job. Next, a special detail — which was held in awe by the other workers — would descend into the tank to remove the remains of the former crew. They would sand and repaint the interior, but they could never get rid of the smell. Once refurbished, the tank would be restored to service, often on multiple occasions. These were very brave men who paid an unconscionable price for the shortcomings of those who had the opportunity to provide them with better weapons. IMHO, credit for winning the war goes to those brave men, not those who designed the Sherman.

[Grunthor]

“William Tecumsah Sherman was a d***yankee.”

Thank goodness!

[PapaBear3625]

Carriers no longer have fixed wing ASW aircraft with the retirement of the S-3. Land based ASW isn't in much better shape.

They have helicopters. I wonder if a Navy version of the V-22 Osprey might be useful in ASW?

[Pan_Yan]

I considered, then discarded, many possible remarks. In the end I decided to just read the comments and smile.

[SmithL]

Active Ping ) ) ) ) ) )

[Non-Sequitur]

They have helicopters. I wonder if a Navy version of the V-22 Osprey might be useful in ASW?

I can remember when the V-22 was being talked about as a replacement for the S-3. In addition to being able to perform the usual ASW detection with sonobuoys it was suggested it could also utilize the dipping sonar of a helicopter. But it was cost prohibitive. When the Soviet Union fell, ASW dropped by the wayside.

[SW6906]

Ping!

[Mariner]

"In war where the enemy can shoot back, our carriers are sitting ducks."While not everyone can be educated on the finer aspects of war at sea, here's a couple of things to consider:

1. When our superior intelligence indicates a REAL threat to one of our carriers, the picket goes up. Nothing can get within 100miles of a Carrier if the battle group commander doesn't want it to. The ONLY way to get to it tactically is for a sub to sit still and hope the carrier passes close enough to get off a shot.

2. In a REAL war, carriers will not be within 200miles of the beach...and certainly not in the Persian Gulf.

3. The price of sinking a US Capital Ship, historically, has been total war. Nukes and all. Great deterrent.

[Doohickey]

What these reports leave out is how coreographed these exercises are. They’re designed specifically to put friendly forces at a disadvantage. SSNs are noise augmented. Certain systems or capabilities can’t be used. Forces out of position. And then there are the stovepipes, moving havens buffers and other and water restrictions that are put in place for safety reasons to ensure that submerged submarines can operate in proximity to each other.

It all makes for a valuable training experience, but one has to resist the urge to read too much into it.

[Mariner]

"Of course, the sub would probably be sunk shortly after he launches, but if the swap is a sub for an aircraft carrier, I wouldn’t be surprised if someone is willing to pay it".

It is well known by every adversarial navy of the world, that the price of a US Aircraft Carrier is nuclear war. We arm ALL of them with nukes, dozens of 'em.

The brash little country with the DE boat hoping to make a name for itself, will do certainly that.