American carrier sunk in the Pacific

[Chemical Ollie]

Lucky for them, it was only an excercise.

Swedish submarine Gotland is currently in the Pacific doing joint excercises with US Navy. According to one of my local newspapers (covering also the sub's home base), it is doing pretty well and has taken close-up pictures of an American aircraft carrier, which equals sinking it in these kind of scenarios.

Lonestar, you are pwned!

Link in Swedish, incuding interview with the CEO of the shipyard, speculating what this could mean for the export business.

http://www.sydostran.se/002.lasso?id=32508&lay=nyheter

[Richelieu]

Pics of the submarine!!!

[Harry Tuttle]

Why are scenes from "Down Periscope" going through my head?

[Flubber]

In these exercises, I always wonder if everyone is revealing their best.

For example lets imagine that the US forces detected the submarine. They might watch it to observe tactics and capabilities.

I'm not saying that this happened. This was a a very quiet sub so perhaps it would score a hit for real. I frankly don't know.

But if I were playing such games, I don't know that I would ever want to reveal my true capabilities. If that means pretending to see an enemy at 1000 yards that I really saw at 2000 or if it means allowing a sub through "undetected", thats what I would do.

Like I said, I'm not saying that's what happened. But if the converse was true and the sub really was successful against the US best efforts, in that case, I would want the suspicion out there that the US forces were handicapping themselves.

It works either way-- There is no way you want anyone having an accurate picture of your true capabilities

[Asher]

Even Canada has sunk US Carriers in exercises.

[Chemical Ollie]

Originally posted by Flubber
---
I would want the suspicion out there that the US forces were handicapping themselves.

It works either way-- There is no way you want anyone having an accurate picture of your true capabilities

I would suspect many of the officers are to proud for that. They wouldn't want to give anyone a walkover.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Chemical Ollie


I would suspect many of the officers are to proud for that. They wouldn't want to give anyone a walkover.

Probably true. I have heard that the US subs often play with a noise augmentation system running. Plus they will let foes in closer before acting so no one knows when they were really detected.

I CAN see a proud officer thinking his ship is the best and making his crew play with only half their capabilities-- OK crew active sonar is disabled and our helicoptrs are unavailable-- go to it


As for the proud officer-- I can see him being very smug at reports his carrier got tagged when he knows he had the sub cold at 10,000 yards. It would be that super-smug insider knowledge thing.

I will repeat-- I don't have any information that this actually happened or happens. But if I happened to lead a carrier group, it would be my most fervent hope that the rest of the world under-estimate my capabilities.

Lets imagine they can easily detect this Swedish sub. Wouldn't it be great if hostile nations bought this particular sub?

Lets imagine this sub is great and can score against an aircraft carrier group regularly. In that case I would not want that fact known too widely. IN fact I would likely let the rumours out that the sub was actually detected early or that the Amerks were running a reduced capabilities type drill

[reds4ever]

Originally posted by Asher
Even Canada has sunk US Carriers in exercises.

Well, the UK did make some cracking subs in the 1950's......

[alva]

hangarfartyg = submarine ??

[Combat Ingrid]

Originally posted by alva
hangarfartyg = submarine ??

hangarfartyg = carrier
ubåt = submarine
amerikanskt = american

They say in the article that the US will not buy the submarine, as they use nuclear ones.
This means that we could test Flubber's hypothesis about hiding ones capabilities. Just check their response to the statement "either you buy this submarine or we sell it to China"

[Richelieu]

Originally posted by reds4ever
Well, the UK did make some cracking subs in the 1950's......

[Arrian]

One would hope that, given that this was a joint excercise, that exactly how the sub evaded detection has been analyzed by the US Navy. That way, in 15 years or so, after multiple cost overruns, we will get a countermeasure.

-Arrian

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by Combat Ingrid
amerikanskt = american

You can't fool me, that's utterly impossible to pronounce

[BeBMan]

Re: American carrier sunk in the Pacific

Originally posted by Chemical Ollie
Lucky for them, it was only an excercise.

Swedish submarine Gotland is currently in the Pacific doing joint excercises with US Navy. According to one of my local newspapers (covering also the sub's home base), it is doing pretty well and has taken close-up pictures of an American aircraft carrier, which equals sinking it in these kind of scenarios.

Lonestar, you are pwned!

Link in Swedish, incuding interview with the CEO of the shipyard, speculating what this could mean for the export business.

http://www.sydostran.se/002.lasso?id=32508&lay=nyheter

I heard similar stories with German subs. These stories say as well they sent the US ship pics made through the periscope that indicated they were in "strike distance". Not sure if it's true or legend

I'm no expert, but I read some of those diesel subs are more difficult to find than the big nuclear subs.

[Combat Ingrid]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
You can't fool me, that's utterly impossible to pronounce

As compared to british city names?