• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Russian attack submarine sailed in Gulf of Mexico undetected for weeks

John.NoseTip said:
Maybe I'm too skeptical but I tend to think these kinds of stories are fear mongering to keep or increase funding as a previous poster stated. Moreover, Russia is standing in the way of western aggressions in the middle east so this story really helps the political dialogue. Even if the story is true Yes military funding should be cut and cut dramatically at least 40% while we're at it abolish the CIA and Homeland Security. If you want safety quit dropping bombs on other countries and meddling in their affairs that will buy you more security than a 100 battleships.
Click to expand...

Hey, Im as liberal as it gets... but even I think this is pretty ridiculous.
 
Porchev said:
I remember when they used to do this kind of thing all the time. It was sort of a cat and mouse game in the Cold War when they were testing our defenses and practicing attack runs on the United States.
Click to expand...

Indeed. I'd like to know how many times in the past this happened.

I got a feeling this is a regular occurrence.
 
Hatuey said:
Hey, Im as liberal as it gets... but even I think this is pretty ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Well most think like you do but I find things like the item below ridiculous






Homeland security is great if you want to fund an organization to trample all over civil liberties but they do jack sh** for security. My goodness the underwear bomber's father notified the embassy his son was up to something and we still let him on a plane.
 
I am not anything like an authority on submarines, but AFIK, the Akula class (NATO designation) submarines do not carry nuclear long range nuclear missiles. The four 533mm torpedo tubes are capable of firing non-nuclear tipped Starfish (NATO name) as an anti-submarine weapon, which have a range of 28 miles. The Starfish can carry a small nuclear warhead, but it is not normally deployed as such in the Akula. The 3 SA-N-10 missiles it carries are an anti-air weapon with a range of approximately 4 miles.

The Akula is an attack submarine, not an SSBN or long range missile platform such as the Typhoon (NATO designation). The report (as are most employed in blogs) was hysterical. ;)

Armament:

4 × 533mm torpedo tubes (28 torpedoes) and 4 × 650mm torpedo tubes (12 torpedoes) (K-152 Nerpa has 8 × 533mm torpedo tubes) 40 torpedoes total
1–3 × SA-N-10 Igla-M Surface-to-air missile launcher fired from sail (surface use only)
Click to expand...
Akula class submarine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Leo said:
I am not anything like an authority on submarines, but AFIK, the Akula class (NATO designation) submarines do not carry nuclear long range nuclear missiles. The four 533mm torpedo tubes are capable of firing non-nuclear tipped Starfish (NATO name) as an anti-submarine weapon, which have a range of 28 miles. The Starfish can carry a small nuclear warhead, but it is not normally deployed as such in the Akula. The 3 SA-N-10 missiles it carries are an anti-air weapon with a range of approximately 4 miles.

The Akula is an attack submarine, not an SSBN or long range missile platform such as the Typhoon (NATO designation). The report (as are most employed in blogs) was hysterical. ;)

Akula class submarine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

Exactly. A lot of attack subs can fire cruise missiles out of their torpedo tubes. But to carry a nuclear-tipped cruise missile? That would be highly unusual.
 
obvious Child said:
Indeed. I'd like to know how many times in the past this happened.

I got a feeling this is a regular occurrence.
Click to expand...

Before the USSR fell apart, I know frequently Soviet bombers tested our defenses and did practice runs toward the United States, and flew off our east coast on their way to and from places, and additionally up near Alaska they flew around up there messing with us too. Our surveillance aircraft and fighter aircraft were scrambled to go intercept and watch them on many occasions. I am sure the same thing happened with their submarines seeing how close they could get.
 
Porchev said:
Before the USSR fell apart, I know frequently Soviet bombers tested our defenses and did practice runs toward the United States, and flew off our east coast on their way to and from places, and additionally up near Alaska they flew around up there messing with us too. Our surveillance aircraft and fighter aircraft were scrambled to go intercept and watch them on many occasions. I am sure the same thing happened with their submarines seeing how close they could get.
Click to expand...

what they would do is come within a certain distance then cruise in circles and wait...to see if we would launch sub hunter type aircraft. If we didn't, they would come in a little closer and wait again, thinking that once we did launch aircraft it was immediately after detecting them, thus they would know the sensitvity and/or range of the SOSUS system.
We ain't that stupid....we would passively monitor them and purposely NOT send aircraft until they were very close, if at all.
 
UtahBill said:
what they would do is come within a certain distance then cruise in circles and wait...to see if we would launch sub hunter type aircraft. If we didn't, they would come in a little closer and wait again, thinking that once we did launch aircraft it was immediately after detecting them, thus they would know the sensitvity and/or range of the SOSUS system.
We ain't that stupid....we would passively monitor them and purposely NOT send aircraft until they were very close, if at all.
Click to expand...

We liked screwing with em. Ahh the good old days.:twisted:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom