4 ms·
Hmm. Around 15 years ago the $100M "gotland" submarines sank the $6B carriers multiple times without detection during war games. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G
by netjiro 8y ago
Hmm. Around 15 years ago the $100M "gotland" submarines sank the $6B carriers multiple times without detection during war games.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotland-class_submarine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotland-class_submarine
As those kinds of subs are available to more and more countries you can't always "park" a carrier group without risk.
- perilunar 8y agoOne of the Australian Collins class diesel-electric subs also 'sank' a US carrier during war games. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMAS_Waller_(SSG_75)#Operational_history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMAS_Waller_(SSG_75)#Operation...
- sandworm101 8y agoSuch wins are generally based on defined senerios. Specificaly, the carrier group is sticking to a known heading, allowing the sub to park itself ahead and wait. And the carrier group's use of active sonar is limited (whales). And the actions of the protecting sub(s) are classified. And we still havent mentioned the rise of anti-torpedo/missile technologies. ... the real outcomes never makes it into the public domain.