Slashdot Mirror
Chinese Sub Pops Up Amid US Navy Exercise
One NATO figure said the effect was "as big a shock as the Russians launching Sputnik." American military chiefs have been left dumbstruck by an undetected Chinese submarine popping up at the heart of a recent Pacific exercise and close to the vast USS Kitty Hawk. By the time it surfaced, the 160ft Song Class diesel-electric attack submarine had sailed within viable range for launching torpedoes or missiles at the carrier. The incident caused consternation in the US Navy, which had no idea China's fast-growing submarine fleet had reached such a level of sophistication.
Time to spend a few billion $ on R&D for new submarines!
"Got rice, bitch?"
Of course, if they're trying to throw the Chinese off, they'll say that.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
While it was no doubt lots of fun to put some egg on the face of the US Navy, I have to wonder why the Chinese did this. Why tip your hand? Now that the Navy knows how sophisticated they Chinese subs are they'll be much more careful in the event of an actual conflict. No doubt there's people thinking of new counter measures even as I type this.
They say it was during an exercise, how did they know that wasn't part of it? :P
:P )
Are they sure it's not the wreckage from one of the broken Canadian subs sold to us by England? (Yes I'm Canadian so it's ok
Finally: Did they manage to get an intact Enigma machine, and sail the crippled vessel back home?
The exercise was presumably planned, so all he had to do was sit by the bottom and wait for the fleet to go overhead.
/.) as I'm about to read the article.
I won't be able to remark any more on the issue though (at least not on
This is a few days old isn't it? Slashdot - you heard it here last.
The Americans had no idea China's fast-growing submarine fleet had reached such a level of sophistication, or that it posed such a threat.
Can you say industrial esponiage?
It also led to tense diplomatic exchanges, with shaken American diplomats demanding to know why the submarine was "shadowing" the U.S. fleet while Beijing pleaded ignorance and dismissed the affair as coincidence.
Yeah that's totally plausible! I mean it's not like the Pacific is this massive body of water that covers a third of the Earth.
I got a catholic block.
The US military can look forward to thirty or so years of such surprises until China achieves technological parity.
Azural - instrumentals
"Hacked by Chinese"
I can understand that subs could compromise their stealth by actively "pinging" their sonars, but why would surface ships not be doing this as a SOP?.
(Unless that would give away friendly sub positions...)
...to lobby for further hikes in defense spending. It almost sounds deliberate. Diesel-Electric subs are noisy little buggers so either the American navy is seriously incompetent or too clever by half.
Given the amount of lead they use I'm amazed it could float.
...it may be that hostilities are about to increase. They've been at showing a bit of their capabilities, physical and electronic warfare-wise for about the last 2-3 years now.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Diesel-electric subs can easily be quieter than their nuclear counterparts. Without the need for cooling pumps a diesel sub can run VERY quietly. Even a natural circulation sub needs a lot of support equipment to keep running.
Though an older technology, diesel-electric submarines can actually be quieter than nuclear submarines. A nuclear reactor has constant motion. There are usually pumps, valves, turbines, all sorts of things that are moving. The US submarine fleet was designed from the beginning to be as quiet as possible, but there's still some noise. It's not practical to shut down and turn on the reactor, so there's always SOME noise being produced.
A diesel electric submarine, on the other hand, only makes noise when the diesel is on. Running on batteries, in absolute quiet mode, a modern diesel-electric can be a hole in the water.
Combine this technology with good intel, and you could conceivably station a submarine dragnet in the path of a carrier group a day in advance and sit on the bottom absolutely quiet. When your target approaches, pump some ballast out (at the risk of making noise) and begin an ascent. The dive planes can convert some of that bouyancy into forward motion, and you could fine tune your course and potentially be within torpedo range before being detected.
The defense against this is to use active sonar. This is anathema to modern sub doctrine, so surface ships might do it, but it's akin to shining a flashlight in a dark room, it will let everyone else know where you are too.
There are russian diesel-electric subs being tested with part-time reactors for extending the underwater life for minimal noise footprint. It will be interesting to see how these develop.
The future of submarine warfare might end up being loud and fast. Google 'supercavitating torpedo' or 'schkval torpedo' to see more. Teaser: Underwater missiles that travel hundreds of miles per hour. Kablooey!
It seems like submarines are outpacing the ability of anti-submarine warfare to keep up with them. While it is somewhat surprising that the Chinese have evolved a quiet submarine, the threat of modern hybrid electric submarines is not new.
Indeed, there are numerous and famous stories of Dutch and German sailors sending back pictures of various US Aircraft carriers through their periscopes. This indicates that they successfully penetrated the US Navy ASW screen, made it to periscope depth, snapped a picture, and then got back out, all undetected. In response to this, the US Navy has actually asked NATO allies equipped with such submarines to drill with the American teams, in order to bolster the US ASW capability. This incident, then, suggests that the US Navy has a lot more to do.
In general, rumours abound that submarines are now operating at close to the ambient noise level of the ocean. If genuinely operated so quietly, and given the difficult acoustic environment of the underwater world, it remains difficult to understand just how one might actually detect a submarine. Certainly, passive detection is difficult, and active detection only gives your own position away.
What's really troubling about all of this is that, doctrinally, the US Navy does not have much in passive armor against weapons at all. Aircraft carriers, destroyers, and more are generally not armoured as doctrinally, the idea is to keep the enemy from engaging your assets to begin with by forming a screen around the capital ships. Thus, we are operating a Navy that has a reduced ability to absorb damage from an enemy increasingly able to inflict it.
If the US does not adjust, then, it is very likely setting itself up for an enormous defeat in a naval engagement against a determined opponent.
This is my sig.
You know, this shows how badly we're going to do in the upcoming Second Cold War. China beats us to the moon, they have awesome subs, and they're slowly poisoning our children with lead and drugs. That's why we should all move to Canada.
Even more dangerous is the fact that it was covered in lead paint.
Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
Those with the connections will always be excused. You'll be left with only those who cannot find any way to avoid it.
The all volunteer force is supposed to give us professional, dedicated warriors. But it doesn't seem to work out that way.
Our fleet hasn't seen real naval combat since WWII. Anti-ship missiles are incredibly lethal and it costs far more to defend against them than it does to fire them. It will only take a few hits to ruin the day for any American task force. Sure, start a war with Iran. After the first carrier takes a hit that knocks it out of action for a two year repair, our fleets will be kept so far out at sea that their tactical usefulness will be zero. Score one for the Iranians.
The whole concept of the super-carrier is very vulnerable at this point given the kinds of weapons available to potnetial hostiles. The only reason why they persist with such glowing reputations is that they have not been put to the test in battle, their vulnerabilities not made clear. In this case they are like the battleships of WWII, or possibly more apt, the battle-cruisers. The battle-cruisers were up-gunned so they could fight with the big boys but they lacked the armor to stay in the fight. Very expensive viking funerals, they were.
The only development that will save the carrier is if active defenses can be improved to the point that nothing but nothing will get through the wall of fire. As it stands, our current ships are simply not survivable. Frigates and destroyers will get goatse'd if hit by a serious cruise missile. The torps out there these days can break a ship in two. The Russians, of course, designed torps that were supposed to be able to bust a carrier's keel in one hit.
Our whole military aparatus is still stuck in the 20th century and is still trying to bring forward concepts that saw their genesis back in the Cold War. It's going to take a serious kicking of our collective asses to force the Pentagon to reevaluate our military and put together something that's realistic and sane. But I'm not sure how big of an ass-kicking it'll take. We're getting a good one in Iraq and the lessons don't seem to be sinking in.
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
This is not news for nerds....or news to anyone. This story is over a year old. How does stuff like this get posted?
Ahhhh the Clinton Legacy does just fine even without Hillary. Thanks for selling us out to the Reds Bill!!
It's not clear whether the sub actually navigated its way into the heart of the carrier group, or whether it was just sitting there waiting for the other ships to sail by. It's a cheap and easy tactic, and they could have had subs stationed along the common navigation channels or the exercise area (which is no secret) long before the exercise, just in case they got lucky and the carrier group sailed over their heads. Worked for the U-boats, still works today.
But it's not quite so easy the second time. Were the US ships using any active sonar? It doesn't say, but my guess is they weren't, because this is a fairly provocative thing to do -- especially if you're in waters that another country is claiming are its territory. But now that the Chinese have made a provocative move of their own, they'll have the picket ships and helos pinging away and dropping sonobuoys. And it wouldn't surprise me if the Chinese subs all find themselves with a silent new shadow the next time they leave port...
Ah, the bad old days are back again.
Am I part of the core demographic for Swedish Fish?
The threat's been building for over a decade, but now it's built up to a head where there is now a moratorium on construction of aircraft carriers.
So here's the scenario: the U.S. and/or Israel is belligerent with Iran and/or outright attacks it. Iran fires a Sizzler missile at an aircraft carrier -- perhaps an old one like Enterprise that the U.S. sticks out in the Gulf and wants to get rid of anyway. The U.S. retaliates by nuking Iran. World War III begins.
It's entirely possible that the Chinese subs are good enough to escape detection by our fleet, or that we didn't detect it due to user error.
Or, perhaps, it was seen and detected all along but we're just saying it wasn't so that we don't give out an idea of what our tech is or isn't capable of.
Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
Submarines and targets.....
I am the unwilling control for my Origin.
There are two kinds of seagoing vessels: submarines and targets.
--
BMO
The minitary need to keep their internal PR machine going. The military soak up a huge amount of the US budget, yet are slipping up. They need to keep selling to the US public to keep getting funding and keeping the generals and admirals from getting fired.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
"Sinnnng, Sing a song...."
On VETERAN'S day, no less (unless it happened on the other side of the IDL...).
"According to senior Nato officials the incident caused consternation in the U.S. Navy.
The Americans had no idea China's fast-growing submarine fleet had reached such a level of sophistication, or that it posed such a threat.
One Nato figure said the effect was "as big a shock as the Russians launching Sputnik" - a reference to the Soviet Union's first orbiting satellite in 1957 which marked the start of the space age."
----
*I* will venture to say that "consternation" is a POLITE, GENEROUS description. The USN/DOD probably are having a major cataleptic fit. They're probably throwing chairs higher, harder and faster than Steve Ballmer, and HE already throws them faster than the speed of light...
Of course, the USN WILL, as obliged, say some shit like, "Well, if this had been the Enterprise, or the new George H.W. Bush, with their CVN ASW/CVIS suite, this would NEVER, NEVER happen. Why, our technological sophistication by FAR outstrips anything the Reds... Umm, are we on tape? Strike that... Correction all after Reds... Chinese Navy has in its inventory. Why, Our USS Virginia and Jimmy Carter boats are quieter at FLANK, above 500 below sea level than a ANY LA SSN or follow-on boat is just sitting at the pier with recirc pumps on minimal output..."
That may be, but you STILL got your ass embarrassed.
But, I don't for one SECOND believe China WOULD attack. They are just saying, TAG. Here's realism for your fake-ass scenarios and drills.
Why am I talking this way? Cuz I'm an ex Sailor, from 1984-1988, and after playing the "Terrorists" in security alerts aboard my second ship (an FFG), I grew to despise TYCOM Longbeach for the shitty scenarios we had. Sure, the "Nav" upgraded since 87, but I was still bored with and tired of officers who cheated their way into regaining control of the ship when I denied them with REALISTIC scenarios.
Also, I don't CARE that drones COST money. You have CIWS to do a TASK, not SIMULATE. That's why the Stark was popped, cuz her CIWS was BROKE DICK, NOT performing to manufacturer's claims. My ship deployed from Long Beach, as part of the NRF in Nov 87, to the Gulf, to in-chop by some date in Jan 88, and we had SIMA, Fleet this and Fleet that and I think Norden or NavElex and a other "experts" aboard, and that fucking GE gun failed to cooperate UNTIL we we're almost done transiting the Strait of Hormuz (Silworm Alley). It woke up to our surprise. Nobody in Long Beach, Pearl, Subic, or on-board could get that goddam gun to do jack shit in defensive mode.
I FIRMLY believe the Stark was a victim of lies all over the place. The ship's captain was a scapegoat. I believe MY ship's captain felt the same, because MANY of us in the crew donated funds to the victims and their families. Few other ships did that. I think our CO was making or allowing us to make a statement.
I also at the time, well, around June 87 as an E-4 Radioman, but not Gunner's Mate or weapons person, told several of the GM's (who were loading the DU (depleted Uranium) rounds into the gun (they were wearing asbestos gloves, but no respirators...tsk tsk...), "This gun isn't worth shit. All the Soviets need to do is pickle our asses from high altitude with a self-guided or corrected set of bombs. They don't even need a direct hit. Just defoliate our masts and antennas. Hell, they could come from zenith and attack the CVNs, BBs and anything else IF they can break through CAP (Combat Air Patrol) for CVNs or sqwack (fake being CommAir (commercial aircraft) and close in on us."
The Gunner's Mate, Guns (as opposed to Missiles)
But, China's stated policy (like the US') is not to fire first. However, China recently stated to the Naval Community worldwide this:
"China will not fire the first shot. But if a shot is fired AT us, the shooter will not fire a SECOND shot."
THAT will keep the smugness, arrogance and cheekiness out of the rest of the navies for the foreseeable future...
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
lolbackdoor So, I do know that there was some recent fuckup where there was a photo of a submarine propeller, possible the chinese already copied it?
Either this is some counter-intel thing ir the leaker is some kind of traitor. I'm sure the Chinese suspected what the American reaction to this was but why confirm it?
There is little that's secret about modern diesel/electric submarines. Submerged they've always been hard to detect. With advances in battery technology and quieter props it's not that big of a shock they could get close enough to launch.
It's not like they were pulling all their clubs out of the bag, it was a demonstration what they could do with fairly basic technology. The real interesting speculation would be what they might have in the inventory that's even more capable. Long range missiles or UAV's that could attack a carrier from hundreds or thousands of miles away, perhaps aided by satellite, robotic mines, or something equally surprising.
When your foreign policy is built around being able to project air power it's a rude surprise to find out in the modern era a floating airport is a big, fat target.
If you really want ulcers start looking up how many countries have similar subs. You might be surprised at some of the names.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
"The war wasn't meant to be won or lost, it was simply meant to be fought. The war was never meant to end, merely to go on."
:)
Do you folks actually think that both sides of this conflict hate each other as much as the peons do? Sheesh. When the rich meet at the country club, the boys from Company A, and the boys from Company B, regardless of nationality, are friends.
The same is true of "presidents", "bankers" and anything else. Gentleman's rules, to all games. Gentlemen don't KILL each other. They get proxies, peons, idiots and fools to slaughter each other in their names. After all, only fools would hate someone they've never had a chance to get to know, or witness first hand their deeds (and their motivation, of course). Short of aggression carried out against the individual in question, "fighting a war" generally involved mass psychosis, usually cultivated by carefully trained and prepared "superiors" and "intelligence personnel."
This stuff's as old as the world. The wars will go on, the arms races will go on, and humanity will go on. All the fears and the doomsayers are merely meant to up the ante, and keep the peons scurrying about, frittering their lives away doing nothing at all interesting or worthwhile, other than what they have been TOLD to do by someone else, for someone else's benefit and minor, if any, benefit to themselves.
Welcome to the future
The only reason I keep watching this mess is because it is, frankly speaking, fun to watch. Nothing more, nothing less.
" What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
One might expect that discovering a few chinks in the national security armour would be expected during an exercise.
This appears to be a year old!
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/11/14/world/main2179694.shtml
RudeDude
Perl/Linux/PHP hacker
There are 10 kinds. Get it right.
What is not said here, is that the sub could have been sitting on the bottom (pretty shallow there) and then popped up. It is probable that China decided to warn us to not mess with them. It is akin to the blowing up of the sat. They could have done it in other fashions. I am guessing that China is a lot closer to a war with the west then is assumed in the west.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
So far we've only heard from the Daily Mail.
Does anyone know of a reliable source commenting on this incident? Because I'm not one to take a tabloid's word for something like this. I suspect they're just trolling for readers like Dvorak & co.
Also note the title of the stories being circulated in the press. "... sub pops up in the middle of an excercise ..." The meaning of middle does not mean 'between' rather it occurred 'during'. More sensational media titles implying things they know aren't true trying to get you to read the article. On another note the story isn't even on any credible news source and that every 'news' source that I looked up has the same pictures and story??? Whatever, it sounds like a group which owns 10 different websites put 1 story(meaning fiction) out. In other news I drove my vehicle in the middle of a naval exercise. Sounds funny doesn't it.
China needs a powerful navy to defend against U.S. imperialist counterrevolution. For the unconditional defense of the Chinese deformed workers state against imperialist attack! For proletarian political revolution in China! Forge a Leninist-Trotskyist revolutionary workers party for proletarian political revolution in China to sweep out the sellout Stalinist bureaucracy! Defend North Korea, Vietnam, and Cuba! For international socialist revolution!
Carriers are projection weapons.
The mistake is that they float.
Long ago we should have began working on carriers designs that were submersibles and only surface in order to let their air craft take off.
I am with Linus on this one. For the life of me I can't understand what this sucking up to RMS is about. Linus himself does not think GPLv3 is a good thing. So why do people keep adopting it.
Without Linus FOSS is tossed. Not following Linus is dangerous for the survival of FOSS.
Because the ad placement seems to suggest so.
Active sonar might be restricted due to the adverse effects on marine life - but you bet it would have been used if we were at (real) war.
For now though, can't we use passive metal detection? I'm not even close to being an expert, but it would seam to me that a large metal object in the water should be detectable - somehow.
"...which had no idea China's fast-growing submarine fleet had reached such a level of sophistication."
Way to go, CIA. Maybe if you'd tortured a few more Arabs you would have found this out in time.
KGB ran circles around US intelligence during the cold war, the CIA was counterproductive in Vietnam, it totally missed the fall of the USSR, and totally missed 9/11 even though they knew at least some of the terrorists were in country, and buckled under to Bush before Iraq.
The CIA has never done anything worthwhile. Its only successes have been deposing various elected and unelected leaders so they can put in corrupt, pliable strongmen, the long term effect of which is to make America more and more hated by oppressed peoples all over the globe.
Play Command HQ online
Not directly related, but here is a nice picture a German submarine took of the USS Enterprise during a NATO exercise. http://rula.de/marktplatz/files/zielfoto_u24_enterprise.jpg
And IIRC, that was during an antisubmarine drill.
'ok who ordered the flied lice'
Like the Soviet Navy tried to do them selfs.
There's a trojan pre-installed on the submarine's main data drive.
I thought Richard Nixon was the one who sold us out...
But do you have any yellow mustand?
We welcome our new Chinese overlords.
p.s. note to the navy: Note to self: Turn on sonar, BEFORE excercises. Not after.
Save us also from those pesky sand bars...
Pal, what you are describing as missing is being developed since hms Sheffield was sunk with a single exocet missile in falklands in 1982. "screening" a naval vessel from any incoming missiles with a hail of bullets is now a long widespread tech. there are many prominent systems on the use. and easily, carriers are the biggest platforms that carry most of these, and screen themselves quite well. im not even talking about fast, anti missile missile systems.
what you said held true at 1980, and had there been a world war, carriers would go bust. but, by then eastern bloc didnt have that capability, west did, and by the time eastern bloc developed it, west developed point defenses.
Read radical news here
Was there a point to that rant? Other than to explain that in 1987 a brand new defencive system didn't quite function up to spec?
You were in the navy, so you know what it's like. I can appreciate that soldiers and sailors alike spend most of their free time bitching about the food, the equipment, their superiors, and the system, but anyone who's made it past basic training should realize that this is the nature of any large organization, and ESPECIALLY one that's constantly changing and adapting to meet new threats.
I would caution everyone to note first of all that the FA is from the Daily Mail and so most of the facts contained therein are subject to question.
As some have noted this incident took place approximately a year ago and in fact it's not even the first time that the Chinese have stalked the Kitty Hawk - albeit from a greater distance that time.
Essentially what the Mail have done here is to raise an issue that ticks all their usual buttons.
Consequently, on behalf of all Brits, I apologise for the existence of the Daily Mail - plainly we should do more to end it. On the other hand, however you have given the world Fox News and Ann Coulter - although they do hold a certain amusement value.
As an exercise use google news to see how many other 'articles' have now sprung up which in places basically copy the DM article word for word.. :)
Reading the comments, it seems like the consensus is that given sufficient time, motivation, and technology it's hard to passively detect a well designed and built submarine in the open ocean, if it's built for quiet (i.e. non-nuclear) and active detection is the electronic version of wearing a "KICK ME" sign.
Well, the solution to that is obvious - do just what satellites have done for surface bases; map the oceans with automated sonar/other detection grids until we know what's going on everywhere, and the dark (unobserved) areas are points of interest simply by appearing - if someone removes our ability to see it's an automatic point of interest.
The environmental impact of doing something like that would not be trivial of course, but probably given sufficient time, money and resources it could be done. It would mean WE couldn't move quietly either, most likely (we wouldn't be the only ones doing it, once it started) but it would make a "sneak attack" rather more unlikely.
"I object to doing things that computers can do." -- Olin Shivers, lispers.org
CIWS works just fine nowadays, except for the amount of maintenance require per actual usage. The require maintenance is and always will be insane, as CIWS (pronounced seawiz) stands for 'closed in weapon system', it's the full package. Radar, weapon, tracking system, and cooling. Everything it needs to shoot except for its own power source. Some of the technology is dated but it's proven, especially in Iraq nowadays. They're sending CIWS tech Fire Controlman to Iraq to work on truck mounted CIWS that can shoot mortar out of the air.
-FC3 (Aegis Computer)
Americans have taken their military and economic superiority for granted so long that it no longer really exists. Months ago, the Chinese let us know they had us by the short hairs with the trade and debt imbalance. Yesterday, we got a message about China's military capability.
Wansu, th' chinese sailor
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Would you like to play a game of global thermonuclear war?
TODO - Insert Creative/Witty Signature
I remember reading a few years ago about the "Australian navy" sneaking up and actually marking American ships in trials with a locally made "Collins Class" (very big diesel) submarine. What the US Navy hates to admit right now is that the much loved aircraft carrier groups are sitting ducks for modern diesel subs and there is little they can do about it.
Let me guess by the beltbuckle that you're from Texas. :P
This is yet another confirmation of the point of view that the modern surface ships are obsolete against even relatively simple (e.g. not nuclear) modern submarines. A large surface ship fleet, like the one in US Navy's possession, is a great tool for attacking and intimidating countries that can't fight back (e.g. Iraq or Iran). However, a relatively cheap modern diesel-electric submarine is well-capable of sinking such large and expensive ships like aircraft carriers while being undetected. Rumor has it that during a recent exercise, Pyotr Velikiy, Russia's most advanced battlecruiser, detected a Kilo class submarine nearby only after the submarine had already "sunk" the battlecruiser at least three times. A similar Kilo class submarine is a relatively inexpensive (under a quarter billion) diesel-electric submarine that Russia had been selling to countries like India and China for many years.
Correct me on this, but I have long imagined there to be a Mad Magazine "Spy vs Spy" quality to the Cold War confrontations. One one hand, you might want to put the fear into the other side that you have a certain capability (i.e. ultra quiet sub). On the other hand, you may not want to tip your hand that you can do a certain thing.
There is this account of a Russian attack sub tailing a U.S. super carrier, and the captain of the carrier ordering increasing amounts of speed to see if the sub could keep up. There was a certain sobering factor that the sub was able to match whatever speed the carrier could reach. Above a certain speed, the sub was going so fast and making so much noise that there was no longer any sub stealth involved, but there was a command decision about whether to go even faster to see if the sub could keep up. On one hand, the sub is giving up intel about how fast it can go, but the carrier is giving up intel on its speed, and the account was that the captain of the carrier gave up on attempting to outrun the sub to not reveal what the carrier could do.
There must be also a factor that any of this sea-going machinery must have a "short time rating" and that one can push the capabilities of the power plant in exchange for shortening its life or needing repairs. I heard an account that when the SS United States (one of the last of the great passenger liners) made a record Atlantic crossing on its maiden voyage, the machinery was never quite the same after that.
So why would the Chinese sub surface. One explanation is that is close to home waters and it was to "teach the Americans a lesson" about messing around in Chinese near-territorial waters. Another explanation, as you have offered, is that the Chinese sub captain panicked, and in so doing gave up some information of about Chinese capabilites that they might want to keep secret.
Who would've guessed... China, the nation tasked with building most of the sophisticated things that are sold in the world, has the ability to build sophisticated military vehicles.
"Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
I don't have the reference to hand so feel free to claim it never happened, but this occurred a few years ago with an Australian Collins-class diesel electric. It also happened a few decades ago with an Australian Oberon-class sub, and ISTR some European sub managed a similar trick.
The problem seems to be that US sub crews simply aren't accustomed to going up against diesel-electric subs, which *are* much quieter than the US nukes. There may also be a hubris effect going on, in that the crews *assume* they and their technology will easily detect interlopers, and therefore aren't as much on guard as they should be.
The worrying bit is that (for want of a better term) "rogue states" are much more likely to be using a diesel-electric sub than anything else.
im in ur xrsize, showing off!
o hai, i upgraded ur rice!
Anybody want my mod points?
I'm beyond draft age, but there's no way I'd subject my younger relatives to being drafted for another BS war-of-choice like Iraq or Vietnam.
I would trust them to be patriotic enough to join up if they were needed to fight a *real* threat like WWII.
My guess is that the submarine sensed the flotilla sailing on a collision course and surfaced to identify and save itself. That still doesn't excuse the US Sonar Operators for not sensing it.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
That the American consumer PAID for this Submarine!!!
As I predicted a few years before, China is the real threat the US needs to worry about -- not some silly "terrorist" threats. I also predict Russia will ally itself with China in any such conflict.
And now for the sad point of this -- a war between the US and China is one the US cannot win at. Period. And as I always say, wars kills millions of innocents. Damned big governments and their military posturing for gain on the geopolitical front. Meanwhile us little guys -- Americans and Chinese alike -- will glow and be vaporised should the Big Boys decide to play with their nuclear toys. Which is inevitable in today's world should a war between two superpowers break out.
Ain't life grand.
Ruby Neural Evolution of Augmenting Topologies
It's still a terrible strategy. A big problem is that the carrier is so valuable that risk of loss will change war plans. It's like pulling out the queen early on in chess. The enemy can threaten the piece and direct much of the order of the game. Similarly, you can't put the carrier into very dangerous positions, for example, constrained positions near shore or in waters where there isn't room for the full fleet group.
Back in 2004, just before I left the Navy, I had a conversation with a contractor who was doing work on the RIM-161 Standard SM-3 defense system out at sea. I asked him what he thought about the Chinese strategy, and explained what I'd been reading about.
The Chinese are following a doctrine of asymmetric warfare, in that they know they can't stand against us toe-to-toe. We've got bigger, faster, stronger ships, planes and weapons. Our defenses are very powerful, and we can sink 20 of their ships in minutes.
So they've been building twenty-one ships for everyone one of our attack ships. Not only that, our defenses are built around sub-sonic missiles and munitions? So the Chinese have developed hyper-sonic weapons, such as the SS-N-22 Sunburn anti-ship missile, against which we have no effective defense.
And lastly, I explained how the Chinese didn't spend billions of dollars on growing their own, proprietary C4I network. Instead, they approached the most advanced, NON-MILITARY businesses in the world-including the US-and said, "We'll give you exclusive rights to business in China if you build us the best C4I network you can design. We'll pay all your expenses and supply free labor."
The result is that they have a C4I network that, while it doesn't match ours, come exceptionally close. On top of that, their C4I uses satellites as an augmentation, not the foundation of their strategy. If we shoot down their satellites, they won't be as blind as we would be if they shot down ours.
Next to last, their coastal and landward borders are protected by a layered defense grid that doesn't rely upon the network as it's sole source of input. Rather, they use a combination of communications strategies to keep each unit in touch with the others, as well as the central command network. Sure, we have the same thing, but they've developed and deployed it along their entire border. NIMBY doesn't seem to be a problem in Communist China like it is elsewhere in the world.
And now we have this.
Up until now, the Pentagon has been aware of Chinese defensive capability and it's ability to severely restrict our ability to launch an effective attack against mainland China. Heck, the Chinese sent us copies of their war doctrine back in 2003, just to brag about it! The gentleman contractor I was speaking with dismissed each of my concerns, saying, in effect, "We know what they can do and have them in the bag. Don't worry, they can't touch us."
I wonder what he's thinking now?
This isn't a warning? This isn't even a threat. This is the Chinese pulling a Nelson and going "HA-HA!" in front of the whole world-and that gentleman contractor-and there's not a whole lot we can do about it.
[End Of Line]
American military chiefs have been left dumbstruck by an undetected Chinese submarine popping up at the heart of a recent Pacific exercise and close to the vast U.S.S. Kitty Hawk - a 1,000ft supercarrier with 4,500 personnel on board.
The Kitty Hawk is not a super-carrier. Its the last conventional carrier left in the US Navy. Japan won't allow a Nuke powered aircraft carrier to be home ported in Japan.
Considering the Kitty Hawk has no S3 Viking (Anti-Submarine) Wing, this is a non-story except for people who want to bash the USA. http://www.kittyhawk.navy.mil/Air%20Wing/cvw5.htm
The Daily Mail in the UK can't report this?
Cheers to the Chinese Navy though. Job well done.
Enjoy,
It's just the normal noises in here.
So the situation that we find ourselves in it often not simple war mongering, or profiteering, but serial killing by insane leaders. Oversimplifying it allows such insane leaders to continue thier rampage.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
That says it all.
You simply can't detect a diesel boat running on the battery unless you're doing a lot of pinging and even then if the water conditions are right they can hide beneath a layer formed by the boundaries between warmer and cooler water, or they can be hidden by chance in convergence zones that form in deep water.
The only things you even stand a chance of detecting when a diesel boat is running on the battery are transient noises - people slamming hatches, auxilliary pumps running or control surfaces moving, that sort of stuff. Even then the odds of you actually realizing it's a submarine and not just winches on a fishing trawler with its engines off are extremely low. It would take a very alert and talented sonar gang to spot one and under the right ocean conditions even they would never be able to spot it.
About the only external noise the propulsion system makes is an extremely small vibration from the armature poles on the electric motor passing the magnets. If you hear that noise you're literally within spitting distance of it and most likely your sensor is about to collide with it.
Not surprising and not scary at all. Don't you remember the stories about the fast attack boat with the cowboy captain that sank the Japanese fishing trawler by surfacing under it? The trawler wasn't even trying to be quiet. Anyone old enough to remember the George Washington sinking the freighter by surfacing under it and then leaving the crew to drown? If they couldn't hear those then not hearing something that was trying to be quiet shouldn't really be news.
Boy those Chinese must've been surprised when they inadvertantly surfaced and were completely surrounded by potentially 'enemy' ships.
Use your head, can't you, use your head,
You're on earth, there's no cure for that - S. Beckett
Hmmm... It seems the USN keeps vacillating between CIWS or RAM or some canister-launched defensive thingy in combination with SLQ-32 (V), rubber ducky, and this and that.
I last read that the KDX-II and KDX-III had or will have RAM. Even the Australian Fleet Destroyer or Air superiority somesuch will not have GE's gatling gun. The pinion/mount will be there, but a box will shoot stinger-like AAW interceptors. I guess having 5 or 15 (seemingly not quickly reloadable) rounds run out in a saturation attack will render the ship to using any quad-cells that MIGHT be loaded with "all-up" anti-missile rounds.
http://english.kbs.co.kr/news/zoom/1356843_11781.html
http://english.kbs.co.kr/news/search_news.php
javascript:Player('url=vnews$2007$05$25$070525_2&kind=vnews')
http://english.kbs.co.kr/news/newsview_sub.php?menu=1&key=2007052513
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&ct=res&cd=2&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.baesystems.com%2FBAEProd%2Fgroups%2Fpublic%2Fdocuments%2Fbae_publication%2Fbae_pdf_ccomms_hms_daring_info.pdf&ei=Chg5R-igIpSKpASMuMXTDA&usg=AFQjCNH3a3UKbXR5c7Zb6wqOjcumBEC5MA&sig2=r4W_JtxKtlyuctiLO9-TZA
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=358261&op=Reply&threshold=1&commentsort=0&mode=nested&pid=21331381
These, supposedly, are the types of ships that will screen CVBGs and amphibious task groups... conduct AAW, ASW, ASUW, etc. in deep water...
I believe the Europeans use Goalkeeper, but even that I think is a modified GE gun.
The current blocks of CIWS may be just fine, but it's tragic that it seems that the Stark was in no position (materiel condition) to USE her CIWS at that critical moment. Either that, or it was in standby mode, cold and not being updated (manually, I supposed) by CIC, SPS-4x, STIR, CAS.. just the Mk1, Mod 0 eyeball and eyeball extenders (10x binoculars, without NVG...) and stunned bridge watch who reacted too slowly or inadequately...
Get or read a copy of "Missile Inbound". It is an excoriating read on the matter. From what I heard (not in the book), Stark only HAD extra AFFF (Aqueous Film-Forming Foam) and CO2 bottles and such because she'd borrowed from one or more ships in her squadron for the Pre-Deployment Inspection, and didn't return things before deploying. I think we did the same thing, borrowing, but we returned stuff. But, after Stark, MOST ships anyway were starting to get what they needed (and sometimes excess provision) for damage control when deploying. We had SHITLOADS of flammables (extra paper for radio, CIC, Supply... to print things out...) and dead weight to remove to lighten the ship back to deployment standards. Amazing what packrats we Sailors could be when complacent.
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
Yeah, aircraft carriers were a big innovation in WW2, but now they're steel death-traps for the sailors inside.
from 2004, Paul Van Riper trashes US fleet using zergrush tactics (lots of small crappy boats)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A28161-2002Aug16
more recently china sub surfaces undetected behind a US carrier within torpedo range.
http://washingtontimes.com/national/20061113-121539-3317r.htm
and this latest demonstration? the Chinese are showing their first wasn't a fluke!
How many small boats and planes do you think China would have along its coasts? Combined with a sub attack, they could easilly decimate the US fleet if it tried to defend Taiwan, for example.
As Ben Rich said about working in the Skunk Works, never work with the Navy. After their success designing stealth fighters and stealth bombers for the Airforce, Lockheed-Martin's Skunk Works proposed a different kind of attack ship to the Navy: stealth nuke ship, four person crew. The Navy didn't buy it, figuratively and literally. Rich claimed this was because of ego. The Navy is all about chain of command. An admiral needs big boats so there's lots of crew to boss around. Robot drones cost less and are expendable, and are, perhaps, the future of human warfare.
If we're discussing psychopathic leaders, Stalin would be a good start.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
.. for no other reason than they lost so much more by surfacing than we could have lost by 'not knowing' they were there.
If I were Naval Intelligence, I'd be happy with the story:
- Chinese 'appear' in middle exercise. Or maybe, we drove over them to give them a wedgie.
- Chinese surface in middle of a naval group to 'consternation'. Or maybe, we ping them so hard they can't even think. Along with torpedo sound and a striking cover of "Whiter Shade of Pale" that deafens their launch crew.
- Chinese have capabilities we are 'astonished' at. Yeah, astonished they would let us know, in fact more astonished that they would let the rest of the world know.
I see this as much victory for the US as anything. We learned much more about them than they learned about us, I bet, and the other navies of the world shared in that wakeup call.
But make no mistake, China is our enemy, if only by their own choosing. And we have a capable enemy in them. It's just a matter of time.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
you can't underestimate those sneaky slanties now can you!
Kind of late to the party on this topic so I'm speaking as much to myself as anyone else, but since I didn't see it addressed after scrolling through the discussion, let me raise the question that perhaps it didn't surprise us. If we did detect it would we have shot preemptively at a sub? Probably not given the few countries that do have subs might make our lives miserable. Plus, if we act all surprised and publish how surprised we were, maybe the chinese will buy it and think that we didn't. I'm not buying it though, I'll bet we have technology down below that nobody is telling me about. I'm not a conspiracy nut theorist, but good counter-intelligence could also be a possibility. To me it's better to act surprised and not be then to shout out, "Hey, we see you!"
This documentary, on PBS, supposedly used newly declassified info. The question at the time
was, was the President of the US at the time, Dwight Eisenhower, asleep at the switch. According
to the documentary, he wasn't. He didn't put much truck in space travel, but he was very very
interested in getting spy satellites to keep tabs on the Soviet Union. The problem was the
legality of satellites flying over sovereign nations. The Russians did it first, so the
precedent was set. One of the talking heads in the documentary said that Eisenhower's big
blunder was not appreciating the public reaction around the world. The documentary also
talked about how he played his cards very close to his vest, and took his secrets to the grave,
never trying to justify his actions in his memoirs or anything.
So, the question now is, were our leaders asleep at the switch or are they just playing their
cards close to the vest, like Eisenhower?
In theory, theory and practice are the same; in practice they're different. (Yogi Berra & A. Einstein)
If we can't keep the CIA from importing tons of coke in electric subs, how are we going to stop the Chinese and THEIR electric subs?!? LOL
rhY
I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
Either way, does it matter if the outcome appears to be the same?
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
What Stalin did was to hold Russia together. If he was soft Russia would have been wiped by the Nazi Germany. If he was so psychotic, why was he helped by the USA then?
Actually I'm amazed you didn't mention Saddam. That woulda been perfect.
Yeah, sarcasm. Did you detect it?
fuck karma, I like saying the truth better
How to "psychotic leaders" or "insane leaders" carry out the murders of millions? Stalin only personally killed some 1000 people or so. His multi million death quota was reached by willing underlings.
Perhaps the blame lies with the sheeple, not with the evil rulers. I've said this over and over again, its "fellow men" who are to blame, not "evil men or evil corporations, but the sheeplike nature of the majority of mankind... the mass man so to speak, for he does not lead, and does not think, he merely follows."
" What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
Oh yeah man, THE WAR is going to be on us any second now. Sure, the US and China are economically tied at the hip and have no large conflicts between them, but lets not reason get in the way of getting scared!
The fact is that the world survived the Cold War, which was a far scarier ordeal. The US has no economic tie ins with the USSR, had every reason to fear that it was an expansionist empire (and they the same), and we had poor communication with them. Now look at China. There no points of conflict except over Taiwan, and lets be honest, the US won't do anything to save Taiwan these days other than pump them with guns and cash. The US and China share the same economic heart and it would be suicide for either party to harm the other. In fact, China is even more bound to the US than the US is to China. To top it all off, the US and China have excellent lines of communication.
There is no brewing war here. The final days of the Soviet Union were a perfectly good time to be terrified that the end was near and the USSR would go out with a bang rather than a whimper. China and the US burning along with their respective economic booms, both rising in power and wealth, are hardly anything worth fearing. The remoteness of war between the two only grows as China only grows as China's becomes more liberal, its power base more diffused among practical minded leaders, and the two nations intertwine economically even further. Rogue Pakistani nukes getting into hands of radicals give me far more heartache than the thought of China deciding that in the hight of the their rising glory NOW would be a good time to be wiped out in nuclear Armageddon.
To be fair to the CIA, it is most likely that the emergence of the ship above water was followed by "We got you guys so good!" and immature laughter.
It never has and never will.
And Japan? Yeah, it was a threat. It was also a sovereign nation with an army and a navy, unlike the guys who perpetrated the 9/11 attacks, who are either dead or living in caves, and would have been in no better shape had we skipped the Iraq adventure alltogether.
Yes - that is in the second paragraph of the article. So why is China not considered a super power anymore? If you leave Nukes out of the equation, I think China stand a very good change of winning a conventional war against the US - although it would not be a pretty war! Technology helps - but numbers sometime help more. The Chinese can just keep on sending troops - wave after wave. As this article also show, they are not that far behind in terms of technology either. In fact, how many electronic components in modern battle craft are manufactured in China?
The only problem for China as I see it is that they will have to fight on home soil. Supporting over a million troops half a world apart is not easy - or cheap.
Cheers all!
Need an ISP in South Africa?
If it surfaced near a modern nuclear career I would be surprised. But it didn't it surfaced near the USS Kitty Hawk, which is 47 years old, about as old as the Song Class diesel submarine.
I suspected from the many errors you make you were either lying, making shit up, or merely repeating fleet rumors - and this statement alone proves it.
If you weren't a GM, why should we trust you about CIWS? Since you incorrectly believe that asbestos gloves (which were long gone from the Navy by 1984 and wouldn't have been required for ammo handling anyhow) and that respirators were required for handling DU rounds (they aren't)...
You don't know what the fuck you are talking about.
Amazingly complicated shit is amazingly easy in Tom Clancy novels and the minds of armchair admirals. (Hint: Among other things you get wrong - it doesn't matter what they 'sqwak' [sic], because combat radars rely on skin paint. Not squawks.)
This incident isn't surprising in the least. During wargames with the Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF) my frigate regularly got its ass kicked by the little Japanese diesel boats that tied up alongside us in Yokosuka. Submarines are a big, big threat and the only things that are greatly effective against them are aircraft and other submarines. Unless they are really trying hard, surface ships are practically blind to subs. And they don't try hard without a good reason, like an anti-sub exercise or a threat. They aren't staffed for it, for one. You have to man the hull-mounted sonar, stream the TACTAS (tactical towed-array sonar), keep track of ocean conditions and thermoclines, track all the sonar contacts and blips you might turn up with all that gear in the water, and keep your ASW helo in the air as much as possible, which means you are at flight quarters every three hours.
That kind of evolution runs a crew into the ground fast. You don't just do it all the time while out on transits or exercises just to 'stay safe'. And contrary to popular belief, the Navy doesn't protect it's carriers very well in the absence of a credible threat. There are only a couple of remotely-unfriendly navies that could possibly take advantage of that, and even if they did we could still send their entire fleet to the bottom (if they had the balls to put it to sea) within a couple of weeks, using *our* subs. Sure it would hurt, but the point is that there's no one around to seriously take us on. Defending against a seriously-take-us-on attack just isn't worth the money it would cost.
Wasn't this like late 2006 or something?
GlobalSecurity, most of the time a reliable source, says so.
Screw the FSM - Real geeks believe in the Invisible Pink Unicorn
> Intended to replace the aging Ming-class submarines, the first Song-class submarine was launched on 25 May 1994 and started sea trials in August 1995. but did not become operational until 1998.
GlobalSecurity again. Do you do research before posting?
Screw the FSM - Real geeks believe in the Invisible Pink Unicorn
I was reading this story the other day along with one about how the 5th fleet will largely be sunk in a war with Iran and yesterday I read a story in the Financial Times - "Admiral William Fallon, head of Central Command, which oversees military operations in the Middle East, told the Financial Times that while dealing with Iran was a "challenge", a strike was not "in the offing"." And, to top it all, the sub-prime meltdown has even reached a pirate torrent site. Its no longer accepting donations in dollars, preferring Euro's. Oh dear, methinks you all best be subscribing to Survivalist Are Us Monthly, have a nice decade.
As Democrat and loyal Slashdot reader I am thrilled that more of these American warmongers can be killed.
I blame the Jew Puppet George Bu$Hitler Chimpy McHaliburtain
If he was spending more time protecting AmeriKKKa instead of blowing the heads of those Army kids for his amusement.
Oh well, every dead soldier is one less ReThuglican and more votes for us Democrats.
"This person might be willing to kill thousands of people simply to pursue a personal power agenda."
Now hold on! I simply will NOT allow you to talk about our president that way!
Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
They demonstrate an anti-satellite weapon. They show off a quiet sub. The second isn't as impressive as it sounds. As any hardcore Discovery Channel watcher will tell you, several of our European allies already have super-quiet subs. But the Chinese show off these new technologies in public. What are they trying to do?
When they look as us, what do they see? Remember, these guys aren't stupid, they listen when Bush speaks, they watch when he acts. They see a president completely disdainful of alliances and diplomacy, dependent upon military force and dedicated to unilateral, unprovoked military actions. They see an American administration encouraging rash behavior in its allies. Remember the recent Israeli invasion of Lebanon? The Bush administration, according to some news reports, encouraged the Israeli government in its invasion plans. What might Bush do next? The Chinese wish to show our president that not every problem has an "easy" military solution. Bush doesn't listen to words, maybe he'll pay attention to deeds.
As Cap'n Jack Sparrow would say: "They put a shot across our bow, matey!"
Yes, they are, and the reason is simple. There are only enough raw materials left at easy to medium hard access to support a bit more than a billion people for the remainder of the century. There certainly isn't enough for 6-10 billion people. All credible non aligned analysts have found this out.
China needs basically all the oil, and a huge amount of the water, and most of the metals being mined just to maintain enough growth to forestall internal collapse and revolution against their overlords. Overlords never like that, so the choice becomes, war against the west, or enough credible bluster to win by default as the west backs down, or face a billion man mob at home.
The mob at home is actually a bigger threat to them they can't control, so they are then forced to go with option B, take on the west and win.
One of the funnier comments against that sort of reasoning I have heard "the US spends more money on its military!". Same numbskulls never appreciate a dollar in the US is like 50 bucks in china for what gets done with it. Now do the math. China has been outspending the ENTIRE west on modernization of its military for going on a decade now. They are advancing perhaps 5 years to the west's one with practical deployments, plus, shifting huge amounts of their people out into the rest of the world to buy up entire production areas, long term contracts for energy, buying off entire governments with foreign aid (larger than the US now), to get access to new markets and the raw materials there. The west puts out football players and gangstah rap stars, they are putting out engineers and scientists. The west is providing 99% of all new R&D free to them in the form of business deals and high level academic access. I imagine anyone in any Phd program here can attest to that, and all you have to do is follow just the headlines of the business section to see where all the real investment interest is going, and where the world is really "making things". You can't win by theory, it takes doing, China is doing, the west invents patent trolls and paper financial products and sitcoms.
This is a no brainer to see.
The Chinese will take over, by force or by bravado, but they are going to take over.
ECM
Read radical news here
Why should "we" start up the draft again, with all you youngsters just lined up to enlist?
You are going to back up your talk by enlisting, right?
If it don't GO... chrome it. ~ Frank Banks
China is brushing the U.S. back. At the moment they feel themselves encircled by the United States and its allies. The recent rapprochement between America and India enhanced that impression.
Their first and most important foreign policy objective is to retake Taiwan. The Chinese Communist Party has staked since its whole legitimacy to rule on that promise ever since the whole actual communist thing was quietly retired. So, before they do anything else, they have to prove to the Chinese people that they are the only ones who can reunite the entire motherland and shake off 150+ years of foreign domination and humiliation.
They would also then like to rise to superpower prominence and achieve hegemony. See their massive investments in Africa and South America.
Hegemony comes later, of course, but the obstacle to both those goals is the United States.
So, they've been acquiring Russian Alphas and shore-to-ship missiles and amphibious landing craft and everything they'd need to prevent a repeat of 10 years ago. That is, the mainland started firing missiles across the straits of Taiwan to scare Chen Shui-bian and the Taiwanese nationalists who want to declare formal independence. The U.S. sent a carrier battlegroup to sail up and down the Straits to tell them that was a no-no; and that one battlegroup, a small portion of our navy, could have sunk the entire Chinese navy in 15 minutes. The Chinese were humiliated, and have been working to get even since then.
In addition to the military preparations, though, they have also been scaling up in espionage, economic weapons (read: massive dollar reserves), anti-satellite weaponry, and even cyber-warfare. You might recall reading in the past six months about the Chinese staging a cyber-assault on the Pentagon, or the successful test of an anti-satellite weapon on one of its own obsolete satellites. You might also be aware of how the value of the U.S. dollar is sliding right now, and can probably imagine what would happen if China suddenly started dumping its hard currency reserves of U.S. dollars; Heck, they could send the dollar into a tailspin if they just decided to stop buying the U.S. govt. bonds the Bush administration has been printing like handbills to finance the disaster in Iraq.
So, they're playing a long game on all the important levels, and it's about the scariest thing imaginable and it's right around the corner. And the United States government has its head so far up its own ass about Iraq and Iran and whatever enemy AIPAC thinks we need to fight, that it will be completely surprised when China does make its move.
Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
This guy knows what it's all about.
Why, yes! I AM new here.
First, there is an alternative. We are MUCH closer to a pandemic. When it occurs, China will no doubt be one of the hardest hit. I would not be surprised to see them lose 25-50% of the ppl. Still, that leaves a LOT of ppl to take care of.
Second, the part that you missed was the money that China is accumulating. So many fools like to claim that it keeps China locked into us and that it will prevent them from going to war with us. But I believe it is just the opposite. The only way that business helps is when both govs. are democracies. Then if the gov. screws over the ppl by making times hard, they get voted out. OTH, China is a totalitarian. They do not care about the money. So what if they lose it. Right now, they have "bought" our manufacturing and American businesses that go to China ultimately see copy cats pop up just down the road. All in all, losing the trillion dollars that they have is NOTHING. It bought them our country and it brought them access to raw material.
Sadly, I agree with most of what you say, but not the last statement. If we get our leadership back, and start encouraging companies to come back home (or stay here), then we will be ok. In spite of the reagan/bush deficits, the feds still carry a lot of weight. Now, if we can get them to spend it wisely rather than on Halliburtons.
You cannot be infinitely cunning in developing new type of counter-weapons. It is better to find more common goals. Best strategy to win is to make everyone want cooperate with you, because you have a desireable vision for the future of everyone.
http://id3as.livejournal.com/
A Sunni/Sheia civil war would really really really upset us.
We hated the Iran/Iraq wars of the 80s, they were terrible for the USA and our allies.
That's why in the 80s we supplied enough weapons to Iraq to kick Iran's butt. We didn't cynically just give them enough to maintain a stalemate. No we wouldn't do something so underhanded, that would be wrong.
And of course a group of people as honest and direct as the US state department would come right out and tell CNN their real intentions regarding the house of Saud and Saudi Arabia.
We would never never deliberately destabilize any region as economically important as the middle east. After all President Bush is an Oil man who would never betray his oil pumping brothers.
Who do you think runs the CIA? Machiavelli? A bunch of boy scouts?
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
China, which, like a lot of Asian cultures strongly favors male babies, has been practicing infanticide (whether by abortion or outright murder) upon it's female population for quite a few years now. End result is that there are, today, more male Chinese babies born every year than female Chinese babies. And the difference between the two is increasing every year.
It's a result of their "one child" policy.
As I recall, this trend, if it continues, is expected to lead to a Chinese M-F birth ratio of something like 130(M)-100(F) by 2050.
Consider: This will result in a LARGE population of Chinese males in 2050 who cannot find Chinese females...because there are none (at least none living within the borders of China).
For the sake of pinning down some actual numbers, let's assume Chinese population growth suddenly stopped today: Based upon today's population levels (1.3 billion Chinese), this sort of imbalance would result in a population balanced with something like 170 million more males than females. A population with 170 million frustrated, angry, men who can't find any women....
Ghengis Khan would have loved it--an army numbering a potential 170 million men. Men who each have some some real, personal motivation for conquest.
-------
The only possible equalizer the west would have against such massive numbers would be nuclear weapons--otherwise, even the largest conventional armies the west could muster wouldn't make a perceptible dent in such a massive horde.
Therefore, the west would HAVE to use N-weapons to have any hope. Hope even of managing a draw.
Which would compel the Chinese to retaliate in kind....
Because apparently the new ultrasonic sonar the Navy favours can be damaging to undersea life. As such there's restrictions on when and where it is allowed to be used outside of wartime.
I for one welcome our new chinese submarine overlords.
Sorry guys, this story is at least one year old, I have the same article posted on a private forum the 14. of November 2006.
That seems to assume that the rich boys have some empathy for each other.
The fact is, a lot of those who end on top are, simply put, sociopaths. A lot of CEOs for example are, and I'd wager that the percentage is even higher (if that's even possible) among politicians.
We're talking people with no empathy for any other human. They're people who can tell any lie or cause any bad things to happen to others, with a straight face. And not have any bad feelings about it later. Because you don't matter. You're an NPC to them.
Some even find entertainment in seeing how much they can harm someone else, and get away with it. In that you are right that some may even start a war, if it looks like they have anything to gain from it, even some momentary entertainment. At the risk of invoking Goodwin's law, Hitler had been diagnosed a psychopath in the first world war.
A lot reinvent their past to whatever milks the most sympathy. It helps manipulate people.
They also have such useful traits (for politics games) as never feeling responsible for anything they've caused, including to themselves. They're also nearly immune to threats, although the smart ones will be logical enough to avoid exposing themselves to unnecessary dangers and repercussions. (E.g., death treats might still make them wear a kevlar vest.) And unlike the popular novel mis-conception, no amount of reasoning or appealing to their feelings and humanity will change them: any attempt at psychotherapy just makes them better at hiding it.
The dumb ones tend to end up in prison or shot by the SWAT, but the really smart ones end up CEOs and politicians.
To get back to the topic, though, there is no indication that they feel any more empathy for each other. It isn't the-rich-vs-peons, it's really each rich psychopath for himself. They'll try to shaft each other just as well.
And, partially also in response to your "welcome to the future," history is full of kings and nobles doing all sorts of painful things to each other.
The age of chivalry existed just because (A) holding an enemy for ransom was more profitable than skinning them alive, and (B) it made it easier to manipulate the peons and lower knights to fight for you. But even then, the same "noble" knights and ladies that afforded chivalry to an enemy who can be ransomed for a tidy sum, seemed to have no qualms with poisoning each other or their relatives for a quick inheritance buck. Some even did it for sport.
Basically, if you couldn't be ransomed or, worse yet, someone stood to make a profit from your death, the whole chivalry ideals ended right there. Then you could expect something arsenic-based in your wine.
So, to get back on topic, when those good ol' rich boys' clubs meet, it's not as much friends, it's more like a thieves' club trying to look friendly until they can rob each other. They won't think they're brothers, they'll think as lowly of each other as they think of the peons. They'll just be polite and pleasant because it's good for business.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
China was just fed up with the US not paying their bills and decided to impound a carrier 'til they pay.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Some years ago the Russian torpedo VA-111 using supercavitating technology managed to reach speeds of more than 200 knots (370 km/h), multiple times the speed of any NATO torpedo. That, too, was a yellow shower.
I could be.
;)
Just saying.
Quack, quack.
this bug will be fixed in the next sub-release :-)
I think you'll find that it was Argentina who invaded the Falklands.
We Build Beautiful Websites
"Interesting how when your own kids are at risk, war doesn't seem quite so wonderful"
My proposal so far is that for there to be an _offensive_ (not defensive[1]) war or other significant military action, there needs to be a referendum first. If there are not enough votes (people just decided to stay at home or had more important things to do like go shopping), the leaders proposing the war get put on death row.
Then later another referendum is held to "redeem" them. If there are unsufficient votes, they get _executed_. If it was found later on that the leaders lied about reasons for the war, they get put on death row and another "save them" referendum is held. On the flip side, if the leaders got executed but turns out they were right about going to war, they get "purple heart" awards and everyone gets to cry and say nice soppy things about them.
To me this is much fairer. If you are a leader and you really believe there's a need for the war, then YOU put your life on the line first, rather than stay safe at home and cry fake tears for the fallen etc. In the old days, kings led their armies to battle (was often considered shameful to not do so). This is not practical nowadays, but I think my proposal allows it to be done "in spirit".
Also, people in the country you are attacking will be more at ease at wiping out your entire country - since > X% of you wanted to kill them in the first place. They would be less half hearted - no need to ask "am I committing genocide?".
So if the country really wants a war, they get a war. Otherwise fuck off and stop playing stupid games with OTHER people's lives.
I suspect other countries would feel much safer from a country that had such a law - why bomb it, just try to convince voters to stay at home and let their leaders die.
But so far hardly anyone seems to like this idea except me. Don't know why. I've heard objections of "that's a crazy and stupid idea", but no reasons were given.
Sure you _may_ lose an element of surprise, but hey you're the one who wants to kill someone else.
[1] Naturally defense is a different ball game. Perhaps you could allow treaties with likeminded (same rules for _offensive_ war) countries for mutual defense.
we send them ore and $$$ for every consumer product you can see in front of you right now and they send us steel in the form of threats...doesn't seem like a good deal...
This happened a few times even in the seventies during NATO Exercises. So why dont you tell us something new. In the meantime why don't the navy buy one of these
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/type_212/
The nuclear submarines are to noisy
Pre WW2 there were movements in great britain to reduce agriculture, farming was not a proper business anymore, far better to have lesser countries do that and use the country side for relaxation.
It made sense, england back then could afford to import most of its food, and its own farming industry wasn't exactly top notch.
Then WW2 broke out, and BAM, no more imports. These days again, people are trying to reduce englands own farming industry with claims it is better to get it from abroad.
The problem is simple, what is true today, doesn't have to be true tomorrow. The entire history of the world is full of examples of nations who thought, oh war isn't going to happen, or we have time, or the rules have changed we no longer need X.
Recent examples, what was the most effective aircraft of the first Gulf War, that spiffy stealth bomber OR the dirt cheap unloved A10 tankkiller.
They hastily had to extend the life of that plane because all of sudden the US needed to destroy lots and lots of cheap tanks. Sure you can blow them up with missles that cost many time the cost of the enemy tank, but the A10 does it for peanuts. The istory of war, the US in particulair is filled with these kinds of examples, were leaders made a mistake of NOT preparing for everything and thought they could limit possible future wars to a single scenario.
We don't know what the future will bring. War isn't in the intrest of china, but war didn't exactly turn out to be in the intrest of germany either. Or japan. Or Italy. The serbs didn't do too well either, neither did Iraq, afghan was rewarded by being once again occupied.
The US military power is largely based on its carriers, they give it the power to project its might where it wants, when it wants it. To suddenly find out that a diesel-sub (not nuclear, a plain old diesel sub) can come undetected in torpedo range is very scary indeed. These things ain't expensive. Even terroriss could afford one. The reason they ain't expensive is that it was thought they were mostly obsolete.
The thing is, this sub was only detected when it surfaced (I am having some serious doubts about this), it could have emptied its tubes in the heart of the fleet, almost certainly resulting in the sinking of the carrier. IF this is true, it means that for instance Iraq could have bought one of these subs and used it to sink allied ships, they had the money.
The motto of any army should be to be prepared for what ever may happen, hopefully by showing that any attack is futile, you can prevent those attacks from happening in the first place. The reason most countries ain't at war is because they know that it would be too risky. All of sudden this story seems to say that risk to attack the US can be reduced. The americans ain't got all that many carriers, just how expensive would it be to equip a fleet capable of sinking all the carriers? You would instantly reduce the US military power.
Is china going to attack the US? Watch Tora! Tora! Tora! a realistic movie about Pearl Harbour. Most of WW2 in fact is one long chain of countries being invaded that didn't think it would happen. It did.
Remember, Pearl Harbour was NOT an attack against the US with a plan to invade and concour it, it was meant to knock the US out of the war long enough for Japan to make its claim in the east and then make peace when it had become too powerfull to be removed.
China might want to do the same thing, not destroy the US or occupy it, simply keep it from interfering in its affairs with for instance taiwan.
The US permantly got a fleet in that area to protect taiwan. Say the chinese launched an attack to reclaim it, the US carrier force would be a massive deterrent, but now they have shown they can take that carrier out. Then the US, with a reduced naval force would NOT be faced with fighting of an invasion force, but freeing an occupied nation.
No china once again upped the stakes in this dangerous game of who is the dominant power in the east. Alth
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
China doesn't want war, not right now at least. It also really doesn't want taiwan. What on earth would it do with it. It just doesn't want to be seen backing down on it either. The current situation suits them and for that matter suits the US and most of the world.
But China is also in danger of being seen as weak, or thinks itself being seen that way at least, so it must show it got a bark. Taking out an american spy plane, destroying a satelite, supporting north-korea (that is mess china would dearly love to get rid off, if only it wouldn't loose face over it) and now, showing that that might US fleet ain't all that mighty after all.
If it did want war, the sub would not have surfaced, it would have quietly slipped away and once out of range send a signal, 'test succesfull' and chinese military planners would have made another mark on their checklist for conditions for a succesfull invasion of taiwan "reduce US capability to interfere".
Upsetting the economy is NOT in Chinese interest, it benefits them far too much. In case of war the world economy would be gone anyway, the US is under no obligation to honor its debts to a country it is at war with. China can't exactly set the bailifs on washintong. Impound Fort Knox?
The US projects its military power by sailing its carriers around the world, and the chinse projects its by popping up in torpedo range and saying "Boom you are dead". It is a game, a lethal game played for high stakes, but the chinese have shown it is still just horsing around. If they were serious, we wouldn't have had this story.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
you can't keep your sonar on all the time. Active sonar can't penetrate the thermocline (except direct line and close). Meanwhile you can see who is there, how many emitters and track their patterns (giving the size and speed of your tankers/main ships). You plot the course they will pass on (while beyond visible range) and vector in some boats for either mine work or silent picket.
Boom.
So you can't have your sonar active all the time.
So you can only turn your sonar on sometimes. However, in a simulation, you KNOW when you've been tangoed. Tie the hands and work without active.
Is it not possible that this was an accident? If I wandered into a foreign nations navy exercise I would probably make them aware of my presence to avoid confusion. It is simply the polite thing to dp!
But its definitely the kind of story the media will pick up on
Do you know what it would cost to employ, train and equip 170 million soldiers? 1000$ is probably a fairly lowball figure if you were to outfit them all as infantry and you'd already spend 170 billion dollars just on equipment. Be generous and assume an average salary of 50$ a month. 8.5 billion dollars per month. And that's if you use them as cannon fodder. If you want proper promotions the salarieas increase, if you want tanks, planes and transports you're looking at another few hundred billion.
Unless the entire Chinese economy would be geared and taxed for war that 170M army would turn out to be little more than cannonfodder for any serious army and almost immobile as the supply lines and transports are insufficient to keep such an army moving. Would be impossible to acquire enough food and supplies just from the conquests, if your supply lines get interrupted your 170M men are going to starve. You're better off using fewer people and more advanced equipment.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
I'm not sure why anybody's "embarrassed". What the hell do you expect when you're selling this country down the river to China in every other respect, from jobs to manufacturing to real estate to massive loans to the USA federal government (in large portion to fund Dickhead's war that nobody else wants)-- while China, on its own, is going around buying practically every resource (particularly energy and steel-related) on the planet. Meanwhile our Doofus-in-Chief continues to ignore China, and the other Doofuses in congress continue to give China "Most-Favored Nation" status year-after-year while simultaneously ignoring civil and human rights abuses while America _drowns_ in pathetic, shoddily-manufactured cheaply made goods-- in some cases downright deadly goods-- from China. We let China sh*t all over us and STILL we continue to bend over and take it....
And we're _SURPRISED_ AND _EMBARRASSED_ ???
Puh-leeeeze -- the corrupt leaders in this country make me sick.
Maybe they wanted to play submarines ... :)
davecb5620@gmail.com
Oh please, spare me the "boohoo, we're all to blame" BS.
If you want to talk willing minions, get this: a full 1% of the population scores a clean psychopath score, and some 3 to 4% (depending on the country and sample) score high enough to be called a sociopath. There are plenty of them available to fill the spot of heartless minion. No, it's not the sheeple who turn into the likes of Yezhov (the "toxic dwarf" that led the NKVD at the apex of its brutality during Stalin's age) because they follow the leader. It's people who were psychopaths in the first place, who find the jobs where such ruthlessness gets them a good pay or free hand in terrorizing others.
The "sheeple" as you call them have many faults, and do tend to be passive and easy to lead or to terrorize. That doesn't make the victims share the blame equally with the butchers, though, any way you slice it.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
...and not a single comment in the entire Slashdot discussion about how pointless all the weapons are. When African tribes battle for supremacy, they are uncivilized (and thus inferior) people. When westerners do the same, it's ok. The bigger guns justify it somehow, I suppose.
The following is NOT a flame or attack on the USA, so please don't think it is one.
Almost every time there's war games played between USA and Australia (such as the Kangaroo series), the Oz subs 'sink' the US carriers in the first two days (often within the first few hours!). Then the exercises continue. I think it shows 3 very important things:
1) The US Navy has such a huge reliance (ouch - bad pun) on it's carriers that it may actually have a real weakness and lack of agility there.
2) US Anti-submarine tech has been developed specifically to deal with the Soviet Threat. The 'New Enemies' don't have what is perceived to be a credible sub force and so there has been no political thrust to allocate funding to a more widely scoped anti-submarine force.
3) Small nations (like Australia, Iran and North Korea) and 'less developed' nations like China, Iran and North Korea can pose some level of effective resistance to US aggression by investing in older submarine tech combined with great training.
I tend to give more credence to well written arguments. Your comment contained
a) glaring typos (loose -> lose)
b) mixed metaphors (print money on trees - the US Mint is run by monkeys?)
c) interesting logic (the market will take care of the second part -> b) find politicians willing to exercise fiscal restraint? Huh? Now that's cynical.)
Regarding the contents of your statements:
The US is not an export driven economy, compared to most any other industrialised nation, so expensive imports will hurt more than can be gained by exports.
I will not start the standard flame war on environmental matters, so no comment.
The citizens as well as the governments are deep in debt and a rise in interest rates and losses in credit ratings have already pushed many over the tipping point, with more to follow. I do not expect that banking crisis to be a short term correction.
One of the difficulties is that measuring superiority with submarines is not as easy as you may think. For instance, every US combat submarine is nuclear - and what that means is that they cannot be silent. Diesel-electric submarines can be 100% silent - and as you probably know, being a submariner, that means that they are 100% undetectable unless you are bump into to them. Nuclear generators need to be regulated all the time - so they cannot shut down, and they have a much louder sonic signature than diesel-electric running silent or even on electric.
So the US got rid of Blueback in 1990 and lost an essential strategic vehicle in the process - short voyage and coastal work, and close work is done better with small diesel-electric submarines. As you know, one of the most important tasks is surveillance and for that you typically get very close to shore.
IMO, the primary purpose of the US submarine fleet over the last few decades was moved away from surveillance and towards providing an undetectable nuclear launch platform - as was seen necessary for the cold war.
Anyways - it's not so hard to identify 'superiority' out of a specific context.
This comment was written with the intention to opt out of advertising.
yeah, all the crap we by from wal-mart
If you owe the bank 1000 dollars and can't pay, you're in trouble.
If you owe the bank a billion dollars and can't pay, they're in trouble.
All the Chinese are doing is showing off their products - maybe the US will want some new subs, get 'em cheap from China!
Yes I am being facetious.
Be nice to people on the way up. You will meet them again on your way down!
"For comparison, the US SSN-688 (Los Angeles [wikipedia.org] class) is over twice as long and has ~three times the displacement".
You say this with apparent pride, which (I suppose) is perfectly understandable. A nuclear-powered submarine is a glorious thing, and no doubt the bigger, the better.
But does it actually buy you anything? As a landlubber and a peasant, I would have thought that provided a submarine can get inside a carrier's escort and fire torpedoes or missiles (which I assume the Song can) any additional size would be a liability. Doesn't it make it easier to detect, less navigable, and a better target?
Patrick Robinson's thriller "Kilo Class" explored the possibility of an ex-Soviet diesel submarine, chosen for its quietness, doing exactly this - before launching a torpedo with a nuclear warhead and pretty much vapourising a nuclear-powered carrier. That was published ages ago.
I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
I always wondered about you sailor boys.
People have short memories which is sad. But in the mid-1990's Bill Clinton allowed the export of this technology as well as faster computers and other technology to be sold, and/or simply gave the information away through not taking action. I guess that he was too busy with Bosnia at the time. I wonder when our troups will come home from Bosnia? Clinton said that it would only be for a short time. Perhaps next month if we're lucky.
I looks to me submarine showed up cause someone ordered noodles over the radio
When it comes to being disciplined around weapons, the principles apply broadly. Many decades ago, Jeff Cooper sponsored/ran a shooting instruction class for juvenile delinquents (as they were called in those days). The principle was simple. He felt that kids going bad needed to have at least one part of their lives where they are trained and responsible, where they can enjoy the rewards of their labor yet be instantly responsible for their screwups. He felt they needed one circumstance where they would succeed at having good self-discipline. He felt that a lack of self-discipline was a root cause of juvenile delinquency. The idea was that success in being self-disciplined under one limited set of circumstances could lead to them employing more self-discipline in other parts of their lives and, thus, screwing up less.
The drill was simple. On the firing range, the kids were told that they could have some good fun and learn something if they did what they were told and consistently maintained the self-discipline necessary to obey range rules. If they wanted to goof around, though, they were welcome to shoot themslves in the foot. (Not really, of course. The actual punishment was temporary or permanent banishment from the program and loss of an opportunity to play with the guns. To those kids, that was a serious consequence.)
There were some amazing success stories from that program. Oddly, nowadays the idea of reforming a kid gone bad by giving him a rifle or pistol and teaching him to use it seems unthinkable. Sad, really. There are some fine life lessons that can best be learned with a rifle in hand. Nowadays, people don't seem to remember that. Really, really sad.
I live in China (I'm a white American expat). I can't remember the context, but the other day a couple of lower-middle-class Chinese guys were talking about how war makes the warmonger poor. It didn't for America in the case of World War One or Two, but apparently it's their perception that it would make China poor.
Men who each have some some real, personal motivation for conquest.
Starcraft 2 is coming out soon. I think that should keep the female-less dudes busy.
Seriously, why China? Its a stable economy, with a stable government, that has vested financial interests in our country (think Made In China). And they like Americans, at least according to my 2 friends who have lived and studied there.
Iran and Islamic Jihad is the biggest threat to US interests... Hmmmm... why did we invade Iraq? Maybe because the Saudis kicked our military out after 9/11, and we needed a new middle-east base of operations.
since it was a deliberate act sinking it would have forced the chinese to think on their feet they probably would have ended up claiming it was a rogue captain or an accident but it would have at least reminded the world that we should be taken seriously
This used to happen from time to time with Soviet ships during exercises in the late eighties - they usually just wanted to exchange vodka for supplies.
A thistle is a fat salad for an ass's mouth...
In that movie, Kelsey Grammar is assigned command of a Korea-era diesel/electric sub with the mission to infiltrate Norfolk harbor and destroy a simulated battleship as part of a military exercise. The purpose of the exercise being to test the capabilities of an enemy working with outdated and surplus weapon systems.
Remember to put on your suspicious hat when reading "public" stories such as this. If the U.S. wanted to make China believe they couldn't detect their "new" sub, they could easily "allow" something like this, and let the media pick it up, so a bunch of folks get their backs patted publicly in China for making such a wonderful technological marvel.
... like being able to track a sub, but instead of firing on it directly, call in a strike from an airborne platform and make it look like a random search (happy coincidence) turned up the sub, or forced them into a maneuver that another sub could easily detect, again masking your true detection capabilities.
Don't think for a second there isn't more than meets the eye here. The U.S. rarely carries its capabilities, especially for sub warfare, on its sleeve, and I'd be surprised if that were the case with this story.
It is actually fairly common in sub tactics to *not* let the adversary know that you can detect them. The less they know of your true capabilities, the less they can factor those capabilities into an attack or defense strategy. Even in times of conflict, its common to concoct situations to mask your true capabilities from an adversary
More than meets the eye.
Why can't I find this story anywhere else? Probably because it didn't happen. That site looks like a tabloid.
Modern submariners are a joke compared to their cold war predecessors.
They can't hold their breath as long?
Recent examples, what was the most effective aircraft of the first Gulf War, that spiffy stealth bomber OR the dirt cheap unloved A10 tankkiller.
They hastily had to extend the life of that plane because all of sudden the US needed to destroy lots and lots of cheap tanks. Sure you can blow them up with missles that cost many time the cost of the enemy tank, but the A10 does it for peanuts.
The problem with the A-10 is that the air force flys them, but they do a job for the army. The air force is always trying to drop them because they don't care about the job that it does.
The reason they ain't expensive is that it was thought they were mostly obsolete.
No one thought they were obsolete. They're quieter than nuclear subs when they run on batteries. The U.S. just doesn't keep them around because they don't fit the kind of long-distance roles we want submarines for.
We can agree on a lot of it. However there is a pecking order and these types tend to try to "climb it". I never said it was "rich vs peons". I said it was "rich vs rich" but the game involved rarely gets any of the gentlemen killed, only the non human/sub human sheeple are butchered.
Frankly I must ask this. If unquestioning sheep populate the places, volunteer for hellish, servile "duties", volunteer to "elect" which of the gentlemen may "rule" for a "limited time" (every game has turns doesn't it?), would you not also feel as if the sheeple were mere food? Does a natural predator or even a natural parasite really care what it eats if that is what it has always been able to eat, or perhaps, if that food volunteered to be a host/prey?? In fact the sheeple actually DESERVE their servitude and their masters, because they consistently vote for these people despite having had CONSISTENTLY bad results each time. Any wild animal would be wise enough to stop doing something that consistently fails and find another way. Yet the sheeple do not. They are even offered ways out by the masters themselves, which they never take, always formulating excuses such as "oh not me, too old", or "ooh, not me, I'm not that kind of person."
Exactly. I see consistent testing by these "masters" in every walk of life, and I'm noticing that they're DARING people to say no, and yet, of all things, that NO word scares the hell out of sheeple and they fear to ever utter it, neither to their own children nor friends nor even to their enemies or perceived enemies. Every time they say NO, they feel as though they have to come up with an excuse. Strange... is it not? The path away from that servile sheepish life is easy but seems hard, and so very few take it.
As for the masters being psychopathic... what would you be if the people around you literally WANTED, VOTED, FOUGHT for their own slavery and then for that of others, and bought (hook line and sinker) every scheme you even only half hatched up and left incomplete??
I've done what I could to see this situation from both sides of the picture, both during my job, school and contracting days, and have found something out (which is why some of my past posts seem so heartless).
People cannot be "freed". If they want no freedom, or restricted freedom, they will change their environment to reflect themselves. That is why we have so many sheeple bleating around the sidewalks and highways and cubicles and warehouses, and they breed and raise more sheeple. Until they look up ON THEIR OWN, nothing changes.
Information will always be available to them, even in Soviet Russia it was available, to all who seek it, if they but look. This is why I wouldn't bleed a drop to "save them" (the sheeple). They must save themselves, not be saved by others.
I for myself have chosen to be "neither predator, nor prey... upon my own species." Your choices are your own. Your mileage may vary with the level of research you put into this subject, and the mindset you approach it with.
" What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
Thank you for your service.
This involves effective emotional communication. Being tightly acculturated with the workforce helps a lot. Engineers only need to communicate factually. The highest level of language skills is not required. H1B competition drives down the price. QED.
--
phunctor
I would just say that.
when your submarine detectors all have 'made in china' stamped on the bottom.
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
News like this is actually great for the US military. Instead of being cast as incompetents, they are the victims of post-Cold-War era politicans who have forgotten what military readiness means. Clinton cut the military and now our national defense posture is suffering. Time to spend more money on more stealth submarines! The air force did the same thing when they vastly over-estimated the abilities of the MIG-25 to get funding for the F-15, and when they "showed" that the SU-27 would dominate the F-15 to get funding for the F-22.
But the problems you stated with the Phalanx CIWS (a big gun) are well-known and has lead to its replacement with Standard Missiles.
A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
- Gates buys stake in aircraft carrier builder
- New Aircraft Carrier to use Windows
Gates and his anti-American movement are not a laughing matter.Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
What is The Daily Mail's agenda in resurrecting a story from 2006 and republishing it with no dates or locations?
http://www.sinodaily.com/reports/Chinese_Sub_Approached_US_Aircraft_Carrier_Undetected_999.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/11/14/world/main2179694.shtml
http://madhousethought.blogspot.com/2006/11/chinese-submarine-stalked-uss-kitty.html
A lot of military bloggers speculate it's just the Mail's way of trying to embarrass the Bush administration over its China policy.
Nobody seems to have mentioned the fuel-cell / diesel electric subs, bet those would be really quite and could run for quite some time. Saw something on the Discovery channel here in Europe about them and they were very stealthy
dmurphy_58@yahoo.com
Off-topic I know but, any submariners want to sign the topside log?
RM1/ss SSN-595 '82-88
"If you weren't a GM, why should we trust you about CIWS? Since you incorrectly believe that asbestos gloves (which were long gone from the Navy by 1984 and wouldn't have been required for ammo handling anyhow) and that respirators were required for handling DU rounds (they aren't)..."
.50 caliber Browning machine gun manufacturing work.
.50 cal, and endured CS gas without hacking and gagging like my JROTC classmates and my bootcamp shipmates; and in the service trained with 12-gages, M-14, etc
No one says you HAVE to. But, I had seen the gun as the Army's Chaparral system when I was in high school. I'd seen it on ships. I'd seen the Enterprise fire it as a demonstration. My ship fired it before. I'd read whatEVER I could about it when I was in high school AND in the Navy.
And, get this: I'd found out (after I left the service) that some dipshit, dimwith politician on the East Coast lobbied HARD to get the gun downgraded so that HIS district constituents could get some of the
The CIWS was DESIGNED to take out:
- aircraft
- high-speed missiles
- small surface craft close aboard (that is, near to the ship, for you landlubbers)
- swimmers/divers
- DOLPHINS
- mines close abort and in the deflection/depression limits of the gun
It also is capable of being fired from local control in case CIC is destroyed or the fire control radars/systems are casualties of fire, explosion, or attack.
The damned gun was software-downgraded so some asshole could get WORK for his district.
On TOP of that, drones are pricey, and the "Nav" was loath to destroy them. Instead we fired AT towed targets, either surface or air.
Oh, yeh, and
-- I was on-track to become ESWS-qualified (Enlisted Surface Warfare Specialist), but I desisted for local political reasons because my chain of command pissed me off in my final 4 months aboard ship in the Gulf in '88, and on TOP of that,
-- I was quarterdeck Petty Officer of the Watch qualified as an E-3 on a ship of 380-420 people.
-- I was qualified duty roving patrol as an E-3, on my first ship which was capable of carrying nukes
-- I was helo cargo handler and chock-and-chains qualified
-- I qualified expert in small arms fire in high school on the match rifle team (not that I was interested in becoming a sniper), fired the M204, M-16, M-14, M-60,
-- I was first-aid certified
-- I was the Captains PERSONAL PHONE TALKER on Flint (AE-32) for maneuvering and UNREP evolutions (I spoke or articulated better than the other deck ape seamen and was gung ho)
-- I was so gung ho that I was on the Security Alert Team and Backup Alert Forces initial reaction teams,
-- I was ALSO part of Flint's Flying Squad, our local initial strike team to combat fires, floods, damage, etc.
-- I was yeoman for my division in Deck
-- I blew away my 3rd and 2nd class fleet-wide exams for Radioman
-- I scored in the top 10% of some 800 Radiomen/women students (across three shifts; I was in class 862233 at San Diego), and earned the privilege to CHOOSE BY NAME my next duty station
-- Onboard JAM, I, as a radioman, started on my own seeking Quarterdeck POOW/OOD training, and my chief was pissed because he was afraid his princely RMs would have to stand QD watches on our undermanned ship
-- I pissed him off when I sought out quals for helm operator; again, pissed for the above
-- I knew both my ships inside out when aboard
-- I was the shipboard terrorist for Security Alerts because I infused a "sea change" in how the SAT/BAF had to cope with non-standard scenarios (I threw the Navy's shit out the window and made up my OWN scenarios, making officers late for 8 o'clock reports, miss movie call, make ships in the squadron nest wonder what in the hell was going on, and they had to reign me in cuz I caused them too much paperwork, time, and embarrassed the officers.
But I'd had adversities, too:
---- My San Jose recrui
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
You are making a fundamental mistake in assuming that if their sub is diesel that the technology is out of date. The article implies that these subs are are newer and show China's improved technical ability. If you did any further research (a problem with the level of work in your post... the irony of it all), you would realize that these were deigned and implemented well after the cold war "ended" (as if it ever really did).
Another example is the Type 212 sub that Germany has just introduced as perhaps the quietest in the world. And it is not nuclear. It is a combination diesel electric and fuel cell.
Both of these are modern era submarines, and as demonstrated by the Chinese, quite capable platforms. Granted they will have a more limited underwater range than a nuclear submarine. However they are at least as dangerous as their battery/electric motors are quieter than a nuclear submarine's. In fact they may be more dangerous given the evidenced short sighted conceit of the American Navy with respect to their self declared superiority. The American military is VERY advanced technologically. But it doesn't mean that others out there aren't as well, even if not in all areas of military equipment manufacture. And it doesn't mean that the technology the the American military have decided not to use is not just as effective (or more so) than what the American military has implemented. Just because 'our side' built it doesn't mean it is the best or that others don't have something that can't beat it or compete with it. History is replete with such examples coming back to bite the unwary and near sighted. As (benignly... this time) evidenced by a diesel electric sub popping up a torpedo's running length from the U.S.S. Kittyhawk. :D
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
Here are some basic observations on the Iraq situation and what we should do to correct them:
There is no singular insurgency in Iraq. Instead there are at least 4 major Sunni groups. According to the International Crisis Group, we have seen a trend of consolidation in insurgent groups, several hundred of which sprung up after the war. Another ICG report details how Saddam used inter-clan strife as a way of ensuring that nobody could ever challenge his rule, so I doubt that these insurgent groups were new with the war, but probably were there before the war (but directed at different targets). According to a BBC report just before the war, Saddam was distributing various weapons to the general public including RPG's, assault rifles, etc. and I expect that the plan was to create the sort of chaos that we are seeing now.
Secondly, I think it is a mistake to see the insurgents as offering an alternative form of governance for Iraq. The Insurgent occupation of Fallujah and their propaganda suggests that they are Safalist in their rhetoric and actions, and see the idea form of government as some sort of mob rule.
A second major factor is the continuing use by the Iraqi government of sectarian militias in both official and unofficial capacities. THis is completely unacceptable because it means that Iraq is engulfed in a viscious civil war, and one side is using our troops as human shields while not playing by any reasonable rules. Bush has shown great hesitation to do what is necessary, which is to tell the Iraqi government in no uncertain terms that if they continue this sort of thing, we will be withdrawing our support for them, and providing their leadership with absolutely no protection even if this means temporarily redeploying back to Saudi Arabia until we have an opportunity to start the nation building process again, perhaps with additional partners from the region.
A second thing which needs to be done is that we need to state clearly that we are currently guests of the Iraqi government and will be more than happy to leave when asked to do so, but that if the current Iraqi government should fall and not be replaced with a representative government, we reserve the right to come back.
A third thing which needs to be done is that we need to scale back on the use of security contractors. These groups, such as Blackwater, have a fundamental conflict of interest in their involvement (i.e their contracts end when things become stable), and so they don't have the incentive to take the big picture into account.
A fourth thing we need to do is start talking to Iran and Sytia. We need to tell them in no uncertain terms that we are willing to given them conditional security guarantees provided that they are willing to respect certain bright lines in the area (no funding attacks on Israeli civilians inside the Green Line, no full nuclear fuel cycle without extremely intrusive inspections, and we want them to start working with us to build a stable Iraq. This is necessary because without those guarantees, the only rational response of Iran and Syria is to meddle in Iraq, fund both sides in the civil war, and more or less ensure that we cannot actually invade them without abandoning our other allies in the world.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
Lars T.
To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck
If OPEC suddenly decides it wants Euros instead of Dollars, all that theory about the US economy being "Ok" will be junk. The US Economy will be in serious trouble overnight.
No sig today...
That a fleet engaged in active exercises missed a massive piece of metal, or that that Navy wants more funding and needs to drum up patriotic shock and horror at how good those damned chinese are? The russ^H^H^H^HChinese are coming!
therefore such a fraction of second setup is impossible to occur for a task force unless they go very near the land, and they shouldnt do that anyway. exception is submarines. but in a state of war, it is duly improbable for a sub to be able to get that kind of opportunity against a carrier fleet. because fleet is gonna use active measures at a state of war - its not afraid of being detected then, since it has the upper hand. also marine life restrictions do not apply to state of war.
Read radical news here
I'd just like to point out that this exchange perfectly illustrates the concept of arms escalation.
Attack by speedboats. Guards on the tanker. Bigger guns on the speedboats. Escort craft for the tanker. Beefier attack ships to attack the escorts. Bigger escorts. Battleships. Aircraft. Anti-aircraft weapons. Submarines.
(I'm not criticizing anything or anybody; I was just amused at the process.)
dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.
Alright everyone.. let's just get along with one another!
This not the first time some like this has happen the to Kitty Hawk Battle group. If you look you would find that the Russians did some thing similar back in 1999 or 2000.
...and this is a crazy thought, but what if they saw the sub coming all along. Nothing like getting the Chinese all excited about their sub being oh so advanced when in reality you can see it coming miles away.
Just a thought.
Ooops. Last minute edit that went awry. That phrase should have been at the end of the following paragraph.
Great men are almost always bad men--Lord Acton's Corollary
Shut the fuck up.
I'm a professional in the mental health industry, with far more qualifications than you. You;re so full of shit I'm surprised it's not spilling out onto my desk.
"No, actually a psychopathic score can also be gotten by those who go "clean logic" route. I've acquired copies of the test scoring schemes a few times after taking several "mind health / personality trait" type exams."
Which test. Name it, and the version, and the year published, and THE TRAINED PROFESSIONAL WHO SCORED IT. You cannot have a valid test without ALL of that information, and you don't have it, so you're a liar.
Or maybe you're not. Give me the name of the test and the professional who scored it, and I'll eat my words.
Any test that YOU can take yourself, and score yourself, is not a test any professional who knows a single fucking thing about testing would give any credence to.
I think you're two years behind the curve on this one.
Thank you - I needed a chuckle this morning.
That list of 'qualifications' sounds impressive - until you encounter someone who has actually been in the Navy. That is, someone who knows just how common and ordinary your claims to 'fame' really are. Not to mention how utterly unrelated to the fields in which you claim competence they are.
Actually, you might be surprised to find out that a large percentage of goods used to construct houses (shy of brick and in some instances lumber - which often is being sourced from canada/siberian regions) does come from china. Those snappy little outlet covers? Light switch? the .27 cent outlet? Ceiling fans? Window hardware? Window glass? Lamps? Furnishing for the home (Ashley's homestore is the #1 purveyor of furniture in the US and their source is china), the list goes on nearly infinitely.
Let's move on to food. Haha, you ever picked up a bottle of tropicana apple juice? Apples from argentina, china, mexico, us, etc are listed as sources. In another year (or two, I forgot) a bill that got waylayed by our government will finally activate letting us see where products actually come from.
You'ld be surprised just what actually is MADE in the us and not just shipped to the US and printed in the usa (or made here and shipped to china...it boggles how this is cheaper but it just works out that way)
Even craftsman tools from sears used to build your house are largely made in china other than some of the most simple dropforged items and every other brand of tools is pretty much entirely made in china.
intended to be informative.
Really before anyone thinks "hey we make this stuff on our own" think about outsourcing and how quarter after quarter as many as 250,000 manufaturing jobs get shed as companies go overseas.
5% is enough to start a panic. The bottom 40% of americans (often the civil cervants and lower to mid-middle and working class) are suffering from a shortage of jobs. Yet productivity and wealth grows because 79% of the spending occurs from the top 60%. You start putting the upper mid and upper class in the red and you'ld quickly see a huge flop. Our economy is based on math. Math in and of itself does not feed you when you're hungry.
*shrug*
The idea to give the kids guns seems braindead to me. Let them take the responsibility for an animal, feed it, clean up, etc. It does wonders, and in case it doesn't work out, nobody gets shot.
I seem to recollect that there was a famous spy case in the late 1980s or early 1990s wherein highly secret designs for quiet propeller designs were given to the Chinese. Does anyone else remember this?
And, if we can believe the USAF/DOD, recently the most of the F-15 fleet has been grounded due to "age" and hours on the airframes. Sounds like a tasty way to get more appropriations/funding for JSF, F22, B3, whatever they wet dream over...
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
Yes, but think of it this way. That 170M is the pool of potential army members -- they are not all going to be fit for the job, and some will be better than others. Prune the tree. Take the best 1.7 million from those and you've got the top 1% killers, the elite. And that's a lot of fucking badass killers.
It's not that I was out of the ordinary, it's that that guy before asked me how I had any position to comment about the gun. The post could go on and on (I ramble too much), and I won't lie or claim to have culled information from the GMs. I just tossed my assumptions at them and they reflected. THEIR own reactions about THEIR equipment was sort of confirmation.
I even had that conversation with the FBI, once, and whether or not the agents knew or cared, I don't know. But they had other things keeping them busy.
But, not every Sailor makes Sailor of the Month. Not every, hell, hardly ANY Sailor makes notional designs of contemporary naval ships, accounts for crew, fuel, food, numerous pieces of major equipment, and does it to scale. Hardly any Sailor attempts to design a nuclear sub based on public information, and draws a 7-bladed prop (in the 70/80's for sure) and freaks out a recruiter.
Most of my shipmates knew their jobs, and like me, they knew others jobs. When striking (studying/working) for E-3, I studied for Mess Specialist, Yeoman, Personnelman, and Store Keeper. I settled on Radioman because it was least physically demanding and least dirty, but it took a lot of my sleep time when called to service teletypes and photo copiers and perform divisional maintenance. Not every sailor, when IN a rate, goes and studies the engine plant, CIC, and other divisions above and beyond that required for ESWS. I SAT IN CIC on my free time, not just for ESWS, but to actually be versatile. The OFFICERS liked that, and the more professional of the sailors did, to, because the got to teach their job to someone aboardship but not in the job.
Not every Sailor as an E-3 pulls extra roving patrols so another sailor could bang his girl in the RASE/Deck shops. Not every sailor does that for FREE, and gets TOLD "you better start charging; you're undercutting us who DO charge." Not every sailor WITH a pistol, on roving patrol, draws his weapon to detain or discourage a recaptured redeserter from trying to re-re-redesert. I DID.
Not every Sailor gets told, "Shit, we're glad you're on OUR side, and not the Russians'." (But, I'm on MY side, at least not long after I JOINED the Nav.
Not every Sailor who joined STUDIED the Navy for YEARS in advance. Then again, not every one gets demoralized over politics and lets it get them down, as was my case.
I joined the USN to die in a submarine battle against the "Soviets" 2,000 feet under water, in the Pacific. I didn't JOIN for , dimwit bureaucrats. The national and local politics were something messing up my mental programming.
So, to SOME extent, I WAS above and beyond my average shipmate. And, I didn't kiss officer or chief ass. I got into a row with my first RMC before he retired. He brought his drunk ass back to the ship one night, and when the patch panel was acting up, he called me incompetent, cussed me out, and when he mentioned shit about writing me up, I challenged him. He took offense to that and told me, "SYES, IF YOU DON'T SHUT UP RIGHT NOW, I WILL **TRICK-FUCK** YOU SO FAST YOU WON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED." I had two witnesses and TOLD them they were my witnesses, and that incensed the chief even more. Eventually, he shut up, left me alone, and let be try to be the professional when-on-duty that I strove to be. His replacement was not even as capable as he was. But I took NO shit, to the extent I could assert myself.
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
"This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we'll be lucky to live through it."
Even more topical with Fred running...<g>
Velocity Girl is one of my fav bands. Is Sub Pop still producing music?
Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!
It can all be more quickly be attributed to the eagerness to please perceived "powerful" or "expert" individuals.
Expert worship, in other words. Common since the day one man learned to drive a nail without bending it and wouldn't let the others know how he did it.
You have to realize the majority of the sheeple are government educated, they never made the attempt to travel or learn on their own... their money spent on booze, cheap cigarettes and porn, not books, and more often not even on that. The herd (sheeple) tend to follow one another, without so much the threat of violence as much as the FEAR of perceived omnipotence on behalf of the state. The powerful only truly need to frame or actually catch one or two people, and the majority, properly schooled in docility and bovine obedience will do the rest of the work. Most often they ask no questions, think no thoughts, and do as they are told.
Your belief that the violence was so commonly used is mistaken. The state, much as the citizens it claims to protect, rely on the threat of violence towards each other to keep each other in control. The actual use of said violence often unbalances the equation and results in a loss for all but those who actually stay clear of the conflict and supply the fighting parties with resources (so as to profit from their conflict).
Otherwise, its all "obedience" training, from the moment we're old enough to be smacked around by parents to the moment we're taught we're too old to live freely.
" What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
This incident happened 10/26/2006 - Did you people just hear about it?
Which competence you utterly failed to support.
Then you are back to your favorite topic - how wonderful you are (or were) and how poorly wonderful you was served by the Navy. I wonder who you are really trying to convince.
No, that's wrong.
It's pegged to a basket of currencies now, of which the dollar is only a small percentage.
Where does the money to buy come from?
That's the only question that I cared to hear you answer, and you didn't.
You still didn't answer HOW it's going to happen.
"from the pockets of the current Chinese workforce"
Who are poor as hell. They magically have money to replace that which was coming from Americans, some of the richest people in the world.
You have STILL failed to answer the question.
You can't answer my question, so you make vague hand waving proclamations instead.
Are you really being intellectually honest when you're assuming the Iraq project is done now and that the net present condition is the end-game from which one may calculate benefits?
I don't know if the idea of establishing democracy in the Middle East as a method of preventing islamo-jihadist attacks will work, but I'm curious about your assumptions for your complaints. It looks from here that you're being pessimistic at the very time the Suni and Shia leaders in Iraq are cooperating to issue a joint fatwah against violence as a means of political change.
That's the single largest step forward in the history of Iraq since the Islamic schism a good part of a millennium ago.
Again, I don't have the experience or knowledge to predict the future, so I'm curious about when others claim they do.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
I would also venture to say my grasp of technology is vastly better then yours :)