|
Weka posted:One section of the report which stood out to me is the following. the us would project plowshare nuke the canal ahead of the fleets arrival i would assume
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 01:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 06:20 |
|
|
The Australian military doesn’t exist to defend Australia but to provide an expeditionary force in American wars, just like us 🤫
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 03:00
|
|
|
they are trying how to minigun Afghan villagers from a sub
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 03:02
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:The American public would lose their goddamn minds and demand nuclear war after the first carrier sunk imo a sunken carrier is grounds for a tactical nuke at minimum
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 03:19
|
|
|
i ctrl+f'd the csis report and for something written during and mentions the current ukraine-russia war there's like basically nothing about drones or uavs lmao like there's a lot of ink spilled about jassm-er wunderwaffen and how harpoons owns but the possible asymmetry of the pla being able to fly drones over from the mainland is just not mentioned at all
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 03:38
|
|
|
CSIS posted:Prioritize submarines and other undersea platforms. https://twitter.com/zhao_dashuai/status/1465328265963261962 uhh what if one of the assumptions for the wargame is incredibly off
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 04:38
|
|
|
Danann posted:https://twitter.com/zhao_dashuai/status/1465328265963261962 the us navy has long been at the mercy of both chinese undersea rock and passing fishing boat technologies
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 04:41
|
|
|
i dont really understand naval warfare but if you're trying to defend a relatively narrow and shallow crossing wouldn't it just make sense to invest in more antiship missiles? well, i guess those are a lot easier to spot then subs. not a navy guy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 04:50
|
|
|
quote:In every iteration, the U.S. player moved submarines into the Taiwan Strait, where they could attack Chinese amphibious ships directly. Indeed, in the base case, one U.S. submarine squadron begins in the strait because that likely constitutes current deployment practice. are you loving kidding me not even Charles Lockwood did this to the Japanese it's suicide to take a fleet boat into littoral waters
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 04:51
|
|
|
Danann posted:https://twitter.com/zhao_dashuai/status/1465328265963261962 If the taiwan strait is about 160 km wide and a torpedo has a 40 km range, an ohio class sub (biggest sub which wouldn't be used in this scenario) has a draft of 10.8m. based on that map even a giant rear end sub would have plenty of room to operate. I doubt they could get the number of kills the exercise assumes but i don't think that's due to the topography
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 04:57
|
|
|
the best way for china to invade would be to build a bridge over the strait just go full neo roman siege engineering. Shallow waters have less three dimensional space so if they were dropping sensor buoys they could really have the space pinned down if they wanted I think. lmao at 30m depth you could be dropping hella depth charges from plane on that. Grognan has issued a correction as of 05:07 on Jan 13, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 05:03
|
|
|
Hatebag posted:If the taiwan strait is about 160 km wide and a torpedo has a 40 km range, an ohio class sub (biggest sub which wouldn't be used in this scenario) has a draft of 10.8m. based on that map even a giant rear end sub would have plenty of room to operate. I doubt they could get the number of kills the exercise assumes but i don't think that's due to the topography There is nowhere to hide in the strait, besides the Chinese subs which are much better suited for litoral waters the entire strait is pretty much guaranteed to be covered by a Chinese passive sensor system which will make tracking subs there incredibly easy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 05:03
|
|
|
Hatebag posted:If the taiwan strait is about 160 km wide and a torpedo has a 40 km range, an ohio class sub (biggest sub which wouldn't be used in this scenario) has a draft of 10.8m. based on that map even a giant rear end sub would have plenty of room to operate. I doubt they could get the number of kills the exercise assumes but i don't think that's due to the topography if some moron put an ohio class in the taiwan strait they would be the dumbest motherfucker in all of naval history
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 05:05
|
|
|
there are a lot of incredibly dumb motherfuckers in naval history but that would absolutely take the cake
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 05:06
|
|
|
atelier morgan posted:there are a lot of incredibly dumb motherfuckers in naval history but that would absolutely take the cake wonder if mcarthur has any descendants in command right now
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 05:06
|
|
|
atelier morgan posted:there are a lot of incredibly dumb motherfuckers in naval history but that would absolutely take the cake dumber than the chicken admiral?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 05:11
|
|
|
atelier morgan posted:if some moron put an ohio class in the taiwan strait they would be the dumbest motherfucker in all of naval history Yeah i was assuming worst case scenario to think about maneuverability. I think any subs going in there would be hosed because that's gotta be a pretty easy place to monitor what's coming and going, so it would be easy enough to constrain the movement of any subs in there and kill them
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 05:16
|
|
|
sullat posted:dumber than the chicken admiral? the us has 18 ohio class submarines, 14 of which form the only truly reliable arm of the us nuclear arsenal and 4 of which provide the us with its ability to threaten to cruise missile absolutely anything anywhere on earth they are the most valuable assets in all of naval history and its not even close
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 05:31
|
|
|
so we just send one of the 4 and not the 14, what's the big deal
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 05:47
|
|
|
the thing about nuclear submarines is that you cannot turn off the reactor, so there's always some machinery running and, by extension, always some noise there are ways around this, but the main one is the thermocline, or the point where there's a sudden drop in ocean temperature due to limits on how far the warming of the sun can penetrate into the water. The thermocline acts as a sort of sound barrier: active sonar will bounce right off of it, and even passive sonar has issues, because if the sound you're hearing has bounced off the thermocline at some point, the thing might be nowhere near where you think it is but a thermocline doesn't show up in very shallow water - you need something like 500 to 750 meters of depth to get a seasonal thermocline in the tropics, and anywhere from 1,000 to 2,000 meters of depth for a permanent thermocline the Taiwan Strait is almost entirely shallower than 150 meters and you don't even get deeper than 2,000 meters until you're well away from the continental shelf (as in the map in the tweet) and that's not factoring in the problem of a lack of maneuverability on the horizontal plane ___ but what if you're NOT a nuclear submarine? the drawback of a diesel-electric submarine is that the electric batteries run out, and when they're out, you need to run on (or near to) the surface with a noisy diesel engine the advantage is that while you're running on batteries, you can be a black hole of sound. You can stop all moving machinery, and just lie at the bottom this works even better when you're in littoral waters, because it's so noisy from all the marine life and the extant traffic and the waves bouncing all around the relatively shallow pool of water that it's hard to make heads or tails of anything, and especially if you yourself are barely making any noise at all the one thing that might still work is active sonar, since no amount of silence is going to make your sub any less of a big hunk of metal that a ping will bounce off of, but the guy looking for you has to know that you're there first so you plunk yourself down at the bottom of the ocean, turn everything off, wait for a big juicy supertanker to pass over you, and take your shot once you shoot, you're almost certainly going to die, because now they know you're there, and you've put yourself in a position where you have limited space to maneuver, and if you're operating deep, you're still running on those batteries, which means you're on a short leash even if you could maneuver but the ROI of a diesel-electric sinking a supertanker, or a big America-class landing ship, or even a fleet carrier, will be repaid several times over, as long as you can pull off what is essentially planting yourself as a sapient sea mine. And if you were a nuc, you'd never have been able to make that shot in the first place the United States Navy built its last diesel-electric submarine in 1959
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 05:51
|
|
|
yes yes we’ve all seen down periscope
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 06:39
|
|
|
so there could be catfish subs just ready to surface and fire as platforms. the future is awesome
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 06:41
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:yes yes we’ve all seen down periscope https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpgYCaYlya8
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 06:43
|
|
|
1959 was a long time ago and that’s a lot of time to make “machinery” quieter.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 06:44
|
|
|
Bar Ran Dun posted:1959 was a long time ago and that’s a lot of time to make “machinery” quieter. to be clear, my point is that the US does not operate any diesel-electrics, so they don't have assets that would be suited for operating in the Taiwan Strait yes, you're right that contemporary subs are extremely quiet
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 06:46
|
|
|
atelier morgan posted:the us has 18 ohio class submarines, 14 of which form the only truly reliable arm of the us nuclear arsenal and 4 of which provide the us with its ability to threaten to cruise missile absolutely anything anywhere on earth I went on a tour of one of them when it was being converted to fire cruise missiles instead of nukes, the chamber with all the launching tubes is so gigantic it feels like being in an optical illusion it's like 50 meters long and the tubes are lined up and it's like being in a funhouse
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 06:49
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:they don't have assets that would be suited for operating in the Taiwan Strait and this I agree with. I’ve been in places in the tropics in the pacific you can see the bottom at 100m. straight up vessel casting a visible shadow on the sea floor.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 06:52
|
|
|
am i dumb or is it obvious that china has enough long range anti-ship missiles that they can defacto blockade taiwan without a navy at all at this point, as long as they're willing to sink civilian shipping to enforce it
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 08:30
|
|
|
Usually, the issue is the reactor’s water pumps which usually still generate some noise even though they have got it down but yeah it wouldn’t be the place to operate larger subs.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 08:32
|
|
|
The Oldest Man posted:am i dumb or is it obvious that china has enough long range anti-ship missiles that they can defacto blockade taiwan without a navy at all at this point, as long as they're willing to sink civilian shipping to enforce it oh definitely, but ships are cheaper and more humane, if they really wanted to enforce a blockade might as well use them and save the ASMs for the us navy (and maybe the japanese navy if they finish the hard turn towards remilitarization)
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 08:40
|
|
|
I feel like if China is going to invade or blockade Taiwan they will probably start producing a heck of a lot of anti ship missiles. I'm also not convinced using (and maybe losing) ships is cheaper than blowing up a couple of ships as a warning.GlassEye-Boy posted:stand off strikes from what? anything within standoff strike range will be in range of Chinese assets including anti-ship ballistic missiles. Planes. atelier morgan posted:the us has 18 ohio class submarines, 14 of which form the only truly reliable arm of the us nuclear arsenal and 4 of which provide the us with its ability to threaten to cruise missile absolutely anything anywhere on earth I think it was the chickens.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 10:11
|
|
|
Weka posted:I feel like if China is going to invade or blockade Taiwan they will probably start producing a heck of a lot of anti ship missiles. I'm also not convinced using (and maybe losing) ships is cheaper than blowing up a couple of ships as a warning. Not sure about the whole thing. Might be worth it to do an outright land invasion of the island if you could get it done before you have to decide whether to sink US aircraft carriers.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 10:30
|
|
|
Hubbert posted:a sunken carrier is grounds for a tactical nuke at minimum there is no such thing as a tactical nuke. you must go instantly strategic or your gonna get MAD
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 10:33
|
|
|
genericnick posted:Not sure about the whole thing. Might be worth it to do an outright land invasion of the island if you could get it done before you have to decide whether to sink US aircraft carriers. i doubt PLA could do that without high casualties and bombardment heavy enough to destroy everything worth having on the island, if they were constrained to the sailing time of a carrier battlegroup
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 10:56
|
|
|
really the first step when invading taiwan is a full strategic nuclear strike on every US missle base and carrier group
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 10:59
|
|
|
The other challenge to war gaming this out for the US military is the assumption that US leadership will be able to tell which blockage is a prelude to war, when China has shown the capacity and willingness to use short term blockades as retaliation for military provocations from the US/Taiwan. Like the premise that as soon as the blockade starts we can steam all our ships from around the world to the area is absurd when you consider the realities of US imperialism. Like are we going to empty out the Persian Gulf every time China does something that *might* be a prelude? Or would we wait until the missiles start flying before making the transit (and fail to follow these carefully crafted scenarios where we win)?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 15:43
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:The other challenge to war gaming this out for the US military is the assumption that US leadership will be able to tell which blockage is a prelude to war, when China has shown the capacity and willingness to use short term blockades as retaliation for military provocations from the US/Taiwan. Also, the US fleet is aging and a third of the fleet is going to be in dry dock and another third is going to in port and perhaps not anywhere prepared to go into combat and the the US is going to have to keep some sailing elsewhere. Honestly, I would say 3 battle groups is perhaps the max with perhaps some supporting destroyers/subs. Also, the USAF can’t really deploy all of its air assets either (and there are going to be structural limits of where they want to deploy considering possible Chinese strikes). I think the PLA can handle that with their current assets. Also, to be honest, the US is used to fighting easy fight not one where they may take heavy losses if not outright get tabled.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 15:54
|
|
|
the US has never believed that it could save a colony on the other side of the Pacific - from the turn of the 20th century, as soon as they were thinking of Japan as a threat, the assumption was that even if the Pacific fleet sailed for Southeast Asia the moment war broke out, they'd never be able to get there in time to save the garrison in the Philippines and that calculus has never gotten any better with time and technology
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 15:56
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:the US has never believed that it could save a colony on the other side of the Pacific - from the turn of the 20th century, as soon as they were thinking of Japan as a threat, the assumption was that even if the Pacific fleet sailed for Southeast Asia the moment war broke out, they'd never be able to get there in time to save the garrison in the Philippines I would say it probably was better for them until the 2010s, but there was an inflection point (perhaps similar to the Washington treaty) that the USN couldn’t be everywhere at once and Japan had enough strength to overrun both the Us and the rest of the European states.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 16:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 06:20 |
|
|
The Oldest Man posted:am i dumb or is it obvious that china has enough long range anti-ship missiles that they can defacto blockade taiwan without a navy at all at this point, as long as they're willing to sink civilian shipping to enforce it I mean it would be like the sub war in the Atlantic; if we have more disposable freighters & crews than they have missiles than the blockade won't work.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 18:32
|
|