4 ms·
I think we could but why build a whole base complete with nuclear weapons handling and reactor maintenance facilities on the Great Lakes? Just use the ones in
by jwithington 4y ago
I think we could but why build a whole base complete with nuclear weapons handling and reactor maintenance facilities on the Great Lakes? Just use the ones in Georgia/Washington.
It’s a fun thought exercise though!
- ceejayoz 4y agoThe idea is that ones based in the Great Lakes would be immune to interception by enemy submarines discovering and shadowing them; you're not gonna get an Akula up the St. Lawrence Seaway.
- sgc 4y agoHowever, it would leave them is a small, well-known area and would allow for easier signature profiling via sensors mounted on any number of craft, that could then be used on other subs of the same class elsewhere in the world. That was the reason why when some idiot in the White House revealed where our subs were near China and HK, it was a big deal.
- Retric 4y agoShips much larger than ohio subs can get into and out of the Great Lakes via locks. Looks like the real reason is a US Canadian treaty. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush–Bagot_Treaty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush–Bagot_Treaty
- hdevalence 4y agoWikipedia lists the https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seawaymax https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seawaymax size as allowing at most 26.5’ of draft, while the Ohio-class submarines require 35.5’. So treaty aside, it seems probably not physically possible, even though the locks are bigger in other dimensions.