Why America’s New Submarine is their Secret Weapon
Vložit
- čas přidán 4. 09. 2023
- Go to buyraycon.com/taskandpurpose for 20% off your order! Brought to you by Raycon.
This ballistic missile submarine is slated to replace the aging Ohio Class subs currently in use. Second only to aircraft carriers, nuclear powered submarines are the most complex craft of the American arsenal. They are a major player in American global military strategy, and how the United States plans to keep its edge against other major world players such as China. When we think of the United States military being used in an international political capacity, we typically think air craft carrier groups sent to another nation’s coastline, or troops deployed to potential conflict zones, but rarely are submarines mentioned in this, despite the fact that they are a critical lynch pin in what is known as America’s nuclear triad.
Written by: Chris Cappy and Justin Taylor
Edited by: Savvy Studios
In short, the nuclear triad is a nation's way of guaranteeing that it never loses the ability to use its nuclear arsenal. This include first ground launched land based nuclear silos, second long range stealth bombers like the B2 or new B21, and third submarine launched nuclear ballistic missiles. When these capabilities are arranged like this it gives you a triangle which is my favorite shape of deterrence. Without any one of these options you would not have a credible hypothetical retaliation. Submarines would survive an enemies first strike of nuclear weapons against the mainland of the United States and be able to retaliate.
In game theory this hypothetically prevents an enemy from ever using its weapons in the first place. Although, Even though I have a bit of the ‘tism even I know people do not operate logically and rationally like game theory robots. Basically The theory is that the enemy could knock out one of your delivery options with a first strike against you but likely never all three at the same time. The US navy puts it this way. The Submarines are operated in a manner that makes their locations unpredictable, while still ensuring that our adversaries know that we have the ability to hold them at risk. This enduring, certain deterrent force acts as an important stabilizer; it is always there and always at the ready.
Task & Purpose is a military news and culture oriented channel. We want to foster discussion about the defense industry.
Email capelluto@taskandpurpose.com for inquires.
#SUBMARINE #NAVY #WAR
This is my first time covering Naval Vessels I'm still learning! Go to buyraycon.com/taskandpurpose for 20% off your order! Brought to you by Raycon.
Do video on 🇬🇪 Georgia
"the lead boat of the class, will be an estimated $6.2 billion (fiscal 2010 dollars)." "The total lifecycle cost of the entire class is estimated at $347 billion" Also its an ballistic missile submarine (SSBN) with an attack sub capability. Even with inflation since 2010 its not $132bn per sub. PS: Virginia Class are the dedicated attack subs.
Small editing mistake at about 4 minutes. You added an extra 0 too the size of the Earth.
It really shows you don't do marine stuff. Others do it better. Maybe better to find topics that involve marine assets without trying to go balls deep into the subject for little gain?
Especially subs are stuff that even surface fleet people don't really seem to grasp.
Dude, you are smarter than to note that the Russian or Chinese navy is in any way close to the US. Drink that cold war era special cool aid?
You can't keep all 12 subs out at the same time. You need enough for rotations, repairs and outfitting and crew rest and training.
something we are going to lack if recruitment can't get enough
Well the Navy always had trouble with recruiting, more so even than the Army. Something about being a "swabbie" is kind of a turn off, knowing you will be swabbing that deck.
@@user-wz1qo1cn3i I never heard anyone say "swabbie" the entire time I was in the Navy. I don't think that is actually a Navy term. They did sometimes say "squid" though.
And besides, I'd far rather have been swabbing a deck than stripping and painting it.
@@nathanahubbard1975 I heard an ex Marine use the term swabbie for the Navy. I did hear that sailors spend a lot of time rust removing and painting.
For some time each SLBM submarine had a Blue crew and a Gold crew. The subs were reliable enough that they were ready to return to sea before a single crew would be ready to do so. So two crews ensured maximum time at sea for the SLBM sub itself. I don't know if that is still the practice.
Great video, but small correction - the Navy would most likely use Virginia class attack subs to chase away flotillas. The Columbia class, like the Ohio before, are Nuke bois...the torpedoes are for defense of the submarine.
@@Freedom_Half_Off yeah of course I didn't mean they'd be out there alone lol..sorry if that wasn't clear. Just mainly pointing out that the torpedoes are for defense of the nuke subs, and that they wouldn't send them for that purpose.
Yeah, that is a pretty huge mistake. The Columbia’s aren’t supposed to get anywhere near an enemy formation.
I wonder if less costly sea drones and AI will make ASW much more potent than it is today. The ocean is a big place, but it is finite, and if the drones are numerous enough, the subs will find it harder to hide and with less time to launch their own attack. A drone sub could connect to a mother drone or ship for battery recharging, diagnostics, and repair and then return to its search program. If it finds something, then it surfaces and starts transmitting its data. It could deploy sonobuoys to maintain contact. Maybe a torpedo can take out the drone, but that can also telegraph the submarine operating area and attract other drones. The drone itself could have some kind of ASW weaponry. I don't think survival gets easier with time for these large, manned submarines.
@@Freedom_Half_OffI think the video did a good job explaining their purpose, the torpedo and further tech explanations felt like a breakdown of developed technologies, etc.
Came here to say this. Ballistic missile subs hide, while attack sub seek.
I was on an older 1960s Polaris sub, and later a plankowner of a Trident sub (1980s). The difference in technology between those two was like comparing a wooden man-o-war to an Iowa class battleship. They had the same basic "stuff"...but everything on the Trident boat was leaps and bounds quieter, easier to use/repair/maintain, and significantly more capable in operation and capability. It's amazing what lessons you can learn in 20 years of real-world operation. I can only guess at some of the advances that the next generation will be putting to sea with.
I know China thinks they have current-generation capable subs, but we've learned the hard lessons and incorporated them; not only in equipment (plans for some of which China may have "acquired" over the years) but in procedures, tactics, operation, and damage control. Brittan is peer level, and France not far behind them, with the Aussies gaining ground....all through allied cooperation. There's no adversarial naval force on the planet that can currently pose a significant threat to the combined US deterrent sub force, let alone a combined allied force. An enemy *might* be able to locate and even sink one deterrent sub, but heaven help anyone who throws the first rock in the near future.
And don't even get me started on the attack subs.......
What about the attack subs?
I served on an LA, and I've spoken to folks who are the Virginias. Told me stuff they shouldn't. Same as you - night and day
@@dynestis2875 while the boomers are designed for stealth, long term autonomous operation, and delivering missiles with pinpoint precision, the attack subs are designed for stealthily finding, tracking, and killing if necessary, adversary ships and subs. They have a lot of the same lessons learned, but much more cutting edge sonar and weapons systems. And the skilled crew to accomplish that. Their missions don't typically require them to stay at sea as long as boomers without port stops, so they don't need as much room for food and such; and they don't have to have an entire compartment dedicated to missiles. They can stuff significantly more high tech stuff into a smaller overall sub.
I like your confidence with our current submarine systems.
A point of concern would be to weight that in an active combat environment.
@@richbattaglia5350 One of the things that you need to understand about the sub service is that even during times of "peace," they (the sub service) are always in war mode. That is the point 24/7.
Another important factor for fleet size is the rule of thirds. Only about 1/3 of your fleet is available for operations at any one time. 1/3 is in maintenance and repair and the final third is breaking in new crews and equipment. In an emergency you can surge that final third out in a somewhat underprepared state. So having 14 subs really means you only have 4-5 on station at a time.
Not in the case of the Ohio class, there were two bases Kings Bay Georgia and Bangor Washington, with at one point 8 subs each, then a couple were converted into SSGN's. The Ohio class actually had two separate crews, Blue and Gold crews so the subs spent more time underway than any other platform ever developed. I did 16 Strategic Deterrent Patrols of about 70-80 days each. There where at most three subs in port that I can remember.. The maintenance and upkeep was done by both crews in a 30 day refit period. They spent a majority of the life cycle under water.
The Submarine is so Good that they named a Country after it
😂😂😂
Fun fact: after Toto released his song south Pangea liked it so much they split and created a country named Africa
District of
It's Colombia, not Columbia. I bring this up, only to keep everyone safe. Sometimes Colombians get bent out of shape about that.
Columbia and Colombia are 2 entirely different things. Colombians get tetchy when you when you say "Columbia".
When I was in the Navy I was responsible for working up acoustic propagation predictions, "maps" if you will of where subs can hide. It's scary. The chances are very low that a sub can be found before it can do damage. As an example, I was on the USS Midway which was conducting flight operations. A mile behind us was a cruiser in 'plane guard' position to pick up any pilots who might have to eject. The weather observer, who had to remain on the 'roof' while flight ops were in progress, after they were over came down to the weather office and asked the weather officer what a periscope looked like. The Wx officer asked him why and he replied that he thought that he had seen one. The Wx officer and the observer then ran back up to 'the roof' and sure enough between our ship and the 'plane guard' there was a periscope. It was a "friendly" trying to see how long it would take to be spotted. None of the lookouts on either ship had spotted the periscope. BTW, the aircraft on a carrier make so much noise that it drowns out the noise that a sub would make. If it had been an 'unfriendly' it would have sunk both the Midway and the 'plane guard.' The question is would it have remained undetected after that point?
Yeah it is spooky how silent the attack subs are, and the boomers take that to a whole new level!
USS Midway went out of service in 1992. That’s 31 years ago. Technology has improved. That’s why you watched this video.
Why didn't someone asked the weather guy if he had ever watched a war movie with submarines? I mean if you've ever watched these type of movies which all men should have watched before adulthood, he would know what the Periscope looks like.
Tbh its kinda surprising that anyone spotted a periscope depending on the weather, your inherently talking about a pipe that is at most a foot or so in diameter and maybe a couple of feet at most above the surface, in ocean waves. Unless you saw a reflection of sunlight its hard to detect anything on the open ocean that dosen't have a decent footprint. Would be interesting to see if any navy specifically scouted for fisherman for that duty thru the years as they would have the most experience in spotting changing conditions on the surface.
@@piersonjamesa I think a bigger problem is that the chance of you having a warship in the area is extremely unlikely. Even if hypothetically a submarine is loud and can be seen from the satellite, if it's located in the ocean, you wouldn't really be able to do anything about it in short notice because you don't have the weapon that have enough range and/or responsive enough to deal with it before it could launch its own ballistic missiles, and modern SLBMs do a range about one-third the circumference of the Earth. By the time you could manage to sink that submarine, it'll pointless because you're attacking a submarine that already emptied its payload and its missiles already destroyed your country.
I've been on several boats. There is no graffiti anywhere in the head of a Submarine. Fun fact when I was assigned to the Dainel Webster she was was in dry dock the interior panels were removed. Part of the steel bulkhead was exposed for the first time since construction in the early 1960s. The dockworkers left painted some unflatering remarks and pictures about The Soviet Union. This part of the bulkhead had not been seen for over 30 years 😂
There are actually 18 Ohio class subs in active service. 14 are classified as SSBN but 4 are classified as SSGN as they went through upgrades to allow the new designation.
Those 4 are now non nuclear so they dont really count in the nuclear triad discussion.
@@bbeen40 they can hold over 130 tomahawks which are nuclear capable. They just are no longer balistic missile capable.
@@esquared5064 Wrong. Nuclear capability of Tomahawks (BGM-109A) was removed in 2010-2013. They are no longer in service as such.
They replaced 24 trident with 144 cruise missles.
Bwaa haha. As Ohios are replaced, cruise missiles.
Overkill is important to maintain the threat, they need to know even if they can shoot down half the missles they'll still be completely destroyed.
There's no kill like overkill.
This is why you need dummy missiles, either real ones or fake ones that show up only on radar. Our electronic warfare system can show up as two projectiles when have 20 coming down on them. I am confidant in our weapons systems. Former Navy squid
Oh please it’s not like our previous nuclear submarines weren’t already capable of destroying the whole world several times over.
This is just more propaganda from the military industrial complex. I can already feel the money leaving my wallet.
@@silentvoiceinthedark5665 im genuinely surprised we havent fielded a type of swarm thing to trick radars
@@joelsalinas6905the issue is that you would need to deliver those resources alongside your weapons, meaning that essentially you would drop dummy bombs with real bombs, and at that point you might as well put gunpowder in them, making them no longer dummy bombs.
That "oh cool I'm anywhere in the world" was underrated as an incredible line
100% agree.
“A triangle… my favorite shape of deterrence.” Just as good, in my view.
I was on the third Ohio ship when it was brand new in 1984. We carried the the UGM-96 Trident 1 with 8 W76 100kt warheads in all 24 missile tubes. 24 of these Ohios were slated to replace 41 older SSBNs of 5 classes built since 1959. The cold war reduced this to 18 finished and the first 4 were converted during a 12 year refueling to SSGB with 7 Tamahawks per missile tube x 24 tubes. Building a 560ft Columbia to match the Size of Ohio with only 16 Missiles instead of 24 better mean we get a Sauna like the Soviet Typhoons.
I'm still thinking about what we could do with 26 million Toyota Camrys
Ok, that title is worded wrongly, 132 billion for 12 submarines. Not 132 billion per submarine.
It says "submarines" not "submarine", implying more than one
Yours is most explicitly honest, both are technically correct
@@Viking102938not $132 billion IN/FOR submarines, $132 billion submarines. If I say "$1000 hotdogs", do you think "that's a lot of hotdogs", or "those are expensive hotdogs"?
he changed the title so i think cappy would agree
And if the channel is American it should read “our” not “their”.
Fun fact: there are more planes underwater than submarines in the air.
There are more submarines underwater than submarines in the world's Navies. Every ship can be a submarine once. Only those who are actual submarines can come back up.
@@funveeable Most famously, the Yamato and the Bismarck have become quality habitats for marine life.
Consider the following:
Remote and AI controlled single use unmanned subs with a 'device' onboard. Could hug the bottom if necessary and then go vertical underneath a ship. No ship would be safe, not even aircraft carriers. Bridges and ports as well. And with AI timed controlled, one moment in time everything okay and a nation has a powerful navy, next moment in time, not so much.
Consider also though: ONLY a successful pro-active space program will potentially save any life on and from this Earth, all other life forms, real and artificial, will die and go extinct with a high degree of certainty.
EXISTENTIAL PHYSICS: Current Analysis:
(subject to revision as new information might dictate):
WARNING: NOT FOR ALL AUDIENCES: Only read this if you think you can handle it.
Future:
a. 6th mass extinction event (possibly occurring now), and the 6th won't be the last. (And 'yes', at least some humans will survive these earlier mass extinction events).
b. Sun becomes a red giant one day as it switches from burning hydrogen to burning helium and will wipe out all life left on this Earth if not even the entire Earth itself. (And 'yes', a long time from now, but the destination is set like a way point on a journey).
c. Our spiral shaped galaxy is most probably collapsing in upon itself, (note: adding to the red shift observations by the way), and it's possible ALL galaxies eventually collapse in upon themselves (not confirmed yet).
d. 'If' one believes in the big bang theory, and space itself expanding, then the entire universe and all in it will most probably end in a big freeze. (And 'yes', a long time from now, but the destination would be set like a way point on a journey). Note also: the singular big bang is probably not really true, there are other 'normal' explanations for the red shift observations, and the universe is most probably not going to end in a big freeze. Also, 'if' the current forces of nature came into existence in the early moments of the expansion of the singularity, and the singularity is still basically expanding, then the forces of nature will probably evolve one day, possibly even in the very next moment of expansion of this universe, and possibly wipe out everything in existence in basically a blink of an eye. Of which note also, the forces of nature as well as the universe always existed and never had a beginning. But 'if' modern science is correct, well ....................................blink...........................................
e. Outer space travel: Currently impossible to do for long periods of time due to:
1. Harmful cosmic radiation, including any potential neutrino impacts. (While most neutrinos go right through us, not all of them do all of the time). AI and biological life would most probably not survive unless proper protections were had.
2. Biological species, especially humans, need proper gravity conditions and large rotating space ships probably will not work for space bases on planets and moons. Otherwise, biological life, especially humans, will not survive long term.
3. Biological species, especially humans, need many more items to properly survive, otherwise they won't.
* Note: If anybody has any actual factual evidence to counter the above, I welcome it.
** HAVE A NICE DAY IF THAT IS WHAT YOU CHOOSE TO HAVE, WHILE WE HAVE DAYS LEFT THAT WE CAN ENJOY. FOR EVERY MOMENT THAT PASSES, ONE LESS MOMENT BEING ALIVE AND ONE MOMENT CLOSER TO BEING NOT ALIVE.
And let's not forget the US Fed with their 'goal' of actually having higher economic inflation. Space travel has gotten more expensive just in my time on this Earth. What is space travel going to cost in the next 100, 1000, 1 million years from now? Economic inflation might just be a contributing factor to all life on and from this Earth dying and going extinct. And 'we' did it to ourselves, or more correctly, the US Fed did it to 'us' including themselves. Idiots.
I live down the road from General Dynamics and it’s pretty cool to see the transport trucks delivering the nuclear cores for the engines
I am a US Navy veteran, and I can attest to the fact that our Navy is the front line of defense which protects our homeland.
Thank you for your service 🇺🇸
Has always been will always be because of our geography.
Australia is getting nuclear powered attack subs not ballistic missile boomers
This comment needs higher visibility. It's a distinction that gets lost far too often in news coverage and online discussion.
To defend our shipping routes with our major trading partner (China) from attack by China. So useful.
Aren't they getting VA class?
@@averagejoe112 Yes. The goal is to deliver 3-5 Virginia class subs while Australia learns domestic SSN production. Subs produced in Australia will be a design that the UK is currently working on, with the addition of some US technology.
@@LiveFreeOrDieDH VA class are good boats.
I actually agree we need more Ohio class type subs. If you look deeply into our nuclear deterrent system, it becomes clear that our nuclear subs are the most capable system of the nuclear triad since our nuclear bombers can be shot down, and our silos have long been identified and can be targeted.
To the contrary , silos are notorious targets , some will absorb direct hits and still launch , they will also likely be empty by the time the enemy warhead strikes .
Having the enemy know where they are increases their usefulness instead .
They are so threatening russia plans to use almost a full megaton to destroy single silos😂
This is a cost-benefit question. An Ohio class SSBN costs about $3bn (2021) per unit while there is literature saying that the cost to build 150 Minutemen silos in SD cost $75M. No year was given for the silos construction but assuming the silos were constructed around 1962 (the year Minuteman I entered service) inflation would bring that to $673M (2021). I would also assume the operating cost for SSBNs would be MUCH higher. 1 Ohio = 20tubes x12MIRVs = 240 warheads compared to 150 LGM-30 silos = 150tubes x3Mirvs = 450 warheads for a rough comparison (too lazy to do the full math equalizing cost and taking into account the cost of operations and the missiles themselves but the Minutemen will give more missiles per buck). Not saying SSBNs are inferior - their survivability makes them better as second strike weapons weeks or months after the initial exchange.
They can try to target them. Russia and China's accuracy is lets just say . LAUGHABLE. The safest place to be is where they're trying to aim.
@@darkodonnie2729.... the hell are you doing calling China's hypersonics (of which they do not have enough to tip a conflict between them and NATO irregardless of my next point) a Dong Feng? Those aren't hypersonics. Those are traditional ICBM, IRBMs, and SRBMs, which pointedly will get detected pretty much the minute they launch in the modern world, we've proven that time and again with North Korea's repeat temper tantrums. Pretty much everyone across every major power group detects it the moment it sets off. It's... not that hard these days with all the systems the major powers have specifically around that.
Stop threatening to 'flip the game board' and destroy the entire planet if the cost of a Big Mac goes up a little bit.
Great video Chris. Upgrading our military assets with the modular concept is highlighted with B-21 bomber. The newest pilots in the B-21 bomber will eventually transition to the B-52 bomber in the future. 😀
B-52 is planned to be in service until 2075 atleast
(they are just upgrading the engines now to high bypass turbofans.)
@@tbas8741
I'm curious once those 50 years are up, what can replace the B-52?
(Assuming they don't develop something superior to it sooner.)
I honestly don’t think people get what a wonder of technology these boats are.
I worked on Britain’s nuclear deterrent, back in the days of the Vanguard Class, and we worked really closely with our American allies. We’d have regular FOKRs and we’d also regularly have to repair the V-Boats when they came back from manoeuvres
To any civvies, it is terrifying how often subs, that are nuclear powered and carrying nuclear missiles, come back to port damaged because they’d hit the bottom
Can you imagine what cappy would do if the enemy used more advanced shapes than triangles, rectangles and circles.
We all know that the enemy uses pentagrams lol
I can see it after the "can't swim around a wet pape rbag" self roast. 👌🏾
DO NOT let Cappy know about Rubix cubes! We may lose him.
Yet again the navy is replacing it’s brand new fleet with a smaller, more expensive fleet. It’s freaking genius right!
The main reason is probably because the previous fleet was too expensive….
??? What?
I did nine Strategic Deterrent Patrols on one of the original “41 for Freedom” SSBNs, a Lafayette-class Boomer between 1977 and 1981. The Trident Missiles were just out on the USS Ohio and USS Michigan. If you were rocking & rollin’ in NY Harbor and we’re aiming for a Pitcher’s Mound in Moscow, a Warhead would fall somewhere in the infield. The Russians used warheads rated in the megatons range versus our kilotons, because their guidance systems weren’t as accurate. My Poseidon Missile Submarine had to be closer to hit that same Pitcher’s Mound. Our Submarines are the deadliest weapon systems known to Mankind and with much praying & steady nerves, you will end up shaving with them after they are scrapped. I quite proud to do my part in preventing the Soviets from dominating the World. My hope is that all of these Boats, like the USS James Monroe (SSBN-622), May they Rust in Peace!
I think you just talked more about subs then the retired sub senior chief I worked with for three years. When I would ask him stuff, he’d give me a look like he was deciding if should call the FBI about me. 🙂
I was in the VP squadrons ( p - 3 Orion's ) looking for those Soviet subs back in the 80's ... just for fun I want on google earth to look at my old base and there are no more P-3 's ...haven't been sense 1994 I guess.... that hurt when your part has passed into history
Me too, from '78 to '81. I was a maintainer. @@stevenphillips3466
Welded on Submarines as a civilian and a leader in the Union. Boilermakers. I've crawled all over a LA class submarine. USS. Dallas, Oklahoma City, Memphis, Louisville and over a dozen more. Good briefing. Well done.
The recent bottle neck at the only airbase for the B-2 bomber highlights the problem of basing all strategic bomber aircraft at one base with only 1 operational runway. An accident on the runway stopped all ops from the base, hemming in most of the airborne arm of our nuclear triad defense for an extended time.
Few submariners would complain about a bigger sub, especially the fast-attack sailors.
BuT ThEn wE woUldnT be FasT aTTaCK TOugH 🤢
A bigger boat just means more to clean. With increased automation, which was bad word on 688 boats, you could fight the boat with smaller crews and need less space.
Lol working on them, it’s nuts to butts, and with temporary services you constantly hit your head
@@jacob11938yeah, having been in both worlds, it's nice when the temp services are gone.
not 'attack' subs, but strategic ballistic missile boats... just sayin...
The main reason for 12 being the minimum number is also affected by maintenance periods. Look at the aircraft carriers, they have a mid-life overhaul that takes them out of a deployable status for a couple years. Guess what we’re also projected to have 12 of, CVNs.
Essentially you only have 1 to 2 that are in active service at any time due to there being 12. 1 is always in refueling, the vast majority are in PIA or DPIAs and then following that, are in workups to get recertified for the next 6 month west pac or med cruise. It is about a 2.5 year cycle with only .5 of that cycle actually having your carrier be active duty and operational for need. In wartime situations, such as 9/11, they could call in some of the ships that were in workup status and we were able to put 4-5 carrier battle groups into the gulf to go after Iraq at the same time, but that has immense long term repercussions upon the ship, it's gear, and the crew morale. CVN-72 which I departed the military from promptly went on a 12+ month cruise 2 weeks after I departed the ship, thanks to 9/11. Imagine not seeing land for that much time, and that was back in the day when we didn't have interwebs on board, at least not for enlisted, so there was no real communication with the outside world or your family. I have no idea what kind of communications they might have these days when at sea.
@@jkutyna I was part of the last full crew on CV-63 out of Japan, then spent time SeaOpDet on CVN-74 before I got out. The operation tempo and delayed maintenance activities is killing ship readiness.
Watching a fellow Infantryman describe the intricacies of a submarine brings a tear to my eye
I'm an 0341. 81mm MORTARS UP. USMC, Invaded Kuwait back in the day. Also guarded nukes at NSB Kings Bay, Ga. Welded on Submarines as a civilian and a leader in the Union. Boilermakers. I've crawled all over a LA class Submarine. USS. Dallas, Oklahoma City, Memphis, Louisville and over a dozen more.
I’m a former infantryman and I spent four years working on the Columbia program 😉
@@JosephsCoat OOO-RAH !!!!!
If I remember correctly, that external hull texture that the Columbia class has was developed by some Rice University students a decade ago to mitigate radar detection. The problem with radar is that it's mostly used for detecting aircraft, but they need a smooth body to reduce drag. I guess they were able to adapt it for sonar, sound waves instead of EM radar waves, and engineers believed the drag it creates isn't as much of issue since it doesn't have an extremely limited amount of fuel
These absorbing surfaces are something extremely old. The application on submarines was at least tested in WW2. But of course there are continous technical improvements
@@frederikqu7717 The German Type 21 subs at the end of WWII had acoustic coatings on their hull flat surfaces but not all over.
sonar, not radar as subs don't fly
They both use wave forms that reflect and have to detect that reflection. The speed of the wave and time and direction of detected reflection build radar images of all types.. but sound also does resonance where tone freq can cause more then reflections but induce vibration and carries fairly far in water but still with some frequency in the ems the water might as well not exist so and airplane overhead pumping out radar waves alone might have issues with a top side sub surface angle designed to avoid reflecting anything back up but if you like can be done in modern times network all your radar systems on ships and planes and detect every reflection and timing from sync separate signal points you can only be stealth by absorbing radar wave and even then the networked radar system can flag the void where reflections are missing that were expected and detect that even.. I have a feeling that stealth isn't really a reality to any fleet and only really can be effective in older environments or single isolate targets.
Radar does not penetrate very far under seawater. Too many desolved metals. Radar is only an issue if a sub is close to the surface or is surfaced or snorkeling. A sub could make a kill and not be detected by radar.
My friend is a nuke tech in Groton. He drove me past the ship yard. Security is every where and no photos are allowed of the outside building.
Nukes are a lie.
I always watch your videos, with much anticipation. What I most appreciate is your knowledge and research into military technologies, impressive to say the least. Don't know or really care how you do it, but you do it. Well done and keep up the good work!
Thanks for all the effort you put into preparing these amazing videos - truly enjoy them.
Good, clear, simple and informative graphic! 04:00 👍 Unfortunately, that's the Diameter... 😃
I am surprised you didn't comment on the extra 0, throwing it off by an order of magnitude.
***Unfortunately, that's an order of magnitude larger than the Diameter... 😃
Or maybe that's what he meant by "sirrrcummmfence"
The strenght pf the US navy is insane. If the worse happen, I would NOT want to be a chinese sailor, at all
I wouldn't want to be any sailor in that battle, there's no telling which way it will go, that's the problem with war.
bf4 scared the living shit out of time with the scene with the sailors being locked under and drowning.. fuck that i could never be a sailor but luckily we have alot of Brave people willing to do that job. Hats off to all the sailors..@@belliduradespicio8009
@@belliduradespicio8009the us navy is too far ahead , thats just plain truth
My money is on the Chinese personally but I feel like it will be a costly battle for both parties, wouldn’t recommend joining the navy anytime soon lol
The Chinese debatably is a near equivalent naval power.
Don't underestimate someone else and overestimate the current Navy. The type 055 is China's best weapon, and the Ohio SSGN's are going to retire soon.
I served on SSN 700 back 20 years ago and even then it was 30 years old. Make no mistake US submarine fleet has been out secret weapon ever since the Nautilus was commissioned as the first nuclear sub ever. Being on a sub that was built in the 70's that was such a technical marvel even in the year 2000 was insane. People can only imagine where we can park these things without anyone knowing. They're incredible
That was the Dallas btw. Fast attack subs were named after cities. Ohio class (boomers) named after states. Seems like they might be moving away from that though 🤔
Love your stuff bro. Super well researched and written - keep up the average work!
The Columbia class isn't an attack submarine - it's a strategic missile submarine. It carries nuclear weapons.
Worth every penny.
A nuclear weapon that Will never be shoot, It seems not worth the peny
@@jesus2621That’s the point. By never needing to shoot, it proves it’s worth.
Nuclear deterrence has been the way the world hasn't been destroyed.... Its worth every penny and is keeping Russian nukes from destroying us and us from destroying Russia you are not a Military analyst... you don't know better then any military strategist or analyst... go sit back down in your chair you arm chair military strategist @@jesus2621
@@jesus2621are you 5 years old?😂
@@robinelliott-ni2eh if you have the weapon, no others will want to strike opon you, but if you do not have it, then they will.
Maybe the Navy should just Build 132 1$ billion dollar submarines and stop complaining about not being able to outspend the Air Force
Those costs would add up reeeeeeeal fast. Not just the actual boats. Paying for 132 submarine crews? Enough mechanics to maintain and repair 132 subs? The food, the radioactive fuel, the paperwork? So much red tape. That would certainly add to the top of the national debt haha
@@rayzerot having 132 single missile Subs with with maybe a dozen man crew wood probably be less easy to defeat then 12 300 man Subs
@@joshuahansen5486 It's literally impossible to only have a 12 person crew, the Alfa's were highly automated and they still had 40 something crew, and that's a small SSN. Even then at the time U.S SSN's still have over 100 sailors in them.
@@joshuahansen5486 A sub with a dozen men to crew it would be so useless that it wouldn't matter how many you had, they couldn't begin to match the capability of the Columbia class boats.
@@M16_Akula-III "literally impossible". No it isn't. But resulting sub would have less capabilities.
My late Uncle, on my Mothers side, was a RN Submariner in the Second World War. His last job was teaching submariners how to escape from a downed sub. ( He had escaped from 4 downed subs over his Service, so knew what he was teaching!) Of course thinks are constantly changing so lets hope these new subs continue to keep the peace.
Thanks Argent Cappy 🎉for the earbuds . We teachers love this kinda support giving up an instant conflict with students
We need to understand that the flotilla that sailed near Alaska ONLY operated in international waters which we must allow a better way to put it is we pulled 4 destroyers and they alone created more fire power than the flotilla itself
@Blake_Bones_69 Thanks for the clear, concise explanation of the “real world” … IMHO think the Navy needs way more destroyers than what they currently have…
I think the infantry will need lightsaber bayonets by 2050. Come on DARPA, make it happen.
When I was part of the nuclear submarine Navy... there were two types of submarines, the Fast Attack SSN and the Fleet Ballistic SSBN... The Fast Attack subs did not carry ICBMs and the Fleet Ballistic did... the Fleet Ballistic boat SSBN earned the nick name of "Boomers".😊
I made 4 deterrent patrols on the USS Von Steuben back in the 70's.
we were presented the scenario that if it hit the fan, carriers had about 7 minutes to live. their escorts, frigates, had about 17 seconds.
If China can figure out how to build a satellite that can detect neutrinos, every submarine would light up like a star. Too bad if the US doesn't know how, China doesn't either.
My favorite shape of deterrence is the circle. If you go up against one - there's no point.
Another reason they could reduce the fleet over time was the constantly improving accuracy of delivery. So nuclear yields went down, number of warheads went up, number of warheads per missile went up.
Being a nuclear worker and nuclear valve mechanic from the 90s. I can understand 12 and how it might be not enough. Deployment 6 months that means 6 could be deployed while 6 are in port during which they are doing their training cycle to go on deployment, which requires underway time. Factor in that it needs maintenance that only a ship yard or a intermediate repair facility can handle and that 6 ships underway start to come down.
The rule of thumb is that you need 3 subs to have one of them on a deterrence patrol. 1 sub is in drydock undergoing maintenance/refit. 1 sub is post-maintenance and doing workups to replace the third sub that is currently underway on patrol. How they are able to have more subs on patrol than what the math allows is by having 2 crews per boat. After a 6 month patrol, the sub's empty spaces are refilled, the crew switched out, and immediately sent back out to patrol again.
Autumn is a second spring when every leaf is a flower.
Pertaining to those coatings being added to the exterior of the subs. I spent a few years working with developments in adapting the new (at the time) mark 48 torpedoes to the submarine fleet. While doing this I was also exploring possibilities in the sailing yacht world.
Bf Goodrich developed an organic impregnated rubber like product that was used to cover the big spherical sonar domes. I subsequently discovered some experiments with this product being utilized on some other exterior portions of the subs. I questioned it drag qualities,..
" I believe the substance you are referring to was a product called NoFoul. It was actually originally developed for use on the spherical surfaces of the sub's sonar dome, as most existing antifouling paints could not be used on the domes... and certainly not metallic ones that would interfere with the sonar signals
I believe you may be wrong about the Mercury content. It was an 'organic antifoulant' impregnated into the neoprene material. I believe this 'organic' material was the predecessor to the 'tin based' antifoulants that are now illegal, but were so effective
I subsequently saw some of this material be utilized on the outer skins of the nuclear subs, and enquired with David Taylor as to whether it had been tested for drag resistance...never could get an answer.
It was VERY effective as an antifoulant, having gone 10 years in tropical waters with virtually no fouling. I was just getting interested in the pleasure boat business at the time, and thought this material might be an excellent item for application there. But when I looked at the price of the product, plus its special glue, it did not offer that great of a savings over the traditional 'pull the boat each year and bottom paint it'. And the latter offered that other work could be performed on an annual basis besides bottom painting Feb 2007"
"Actually that material No-Foul was developed for use on the submarine sonar domes, and as such metal based antifoulatants were discouraged. It was the organic TBTF (antifouling agent, tributyltin fluoride) agent that was impregnated into the elastic rubber material. It worked.
Actually that material No-Foul was developed for use on the submarine sonar domes, and as such metal based antifoulatants were discouraged. It was the organic TBTF (antifouling agent, tributyltin fluoride) agent that was impregnated into the elastic rubber material. It worked."
That 'organic anti-foulant' was subsequently outlawed on pleasure boats a number of years later.
I think that with the increased power available to these subs drag becomes a less critical factor. Perhaps there has been a tradeoff of stealth for drag.
Worked for a company back in the mid 90's that sold a very special machine to the USN. It had to do with rubber extrusion. A government rep was there to watch 100% of the manufacturing process, until the machine shipped out in an unmarked tractor trailer. It was special because of being made of aluminum, so it would be easier to move about.
We really appreciated our Mark 48 ADCAPS even in the 90's
you have advanced from your original vids to prime time new grade performance. congrats
The Navy needs exactly the number of subs to cover the entirety of the planet's land area, which includes however many subs can be expected to be in dock at any point in time.
Got to play with an LA attack boat off the coast of Korea in the mid 90s I was on a Spruence at the time. After 3 days of not even getting a whiff of it for the last exercise they told us where they'd be on a 30 minute track, just so our sonar techs would learn what a sub sounded like. We still didn't pick it up. Granted, the waters in that area suck for ASW work but still my significantly high respect for Bubbleheads shot through the roof. I understood why they referred to surface ships simply as 'targets'.
So many video clips of analog instrumentation, Russian and US ships combined (Typhoon, Virginia, Los Angeles, Ohio), kinda snatch and grab.
For the initiate, it’s a decent explanation and compilation of duties and strategies. It’s very rudimentary with some goofiness thrown in.
I do love all the naval shots though, mostly the subs. I build the engine rooms (propulsion spaces) for VA class subs at NNews SB, so seeing these pics on CZcams that I can’t take out of the yard (due to confidentiality) is really cool.
“What did you do today honey?” asks my wife.
“Great, technical, good stuff! I just can’t show or explain it to you,” I reply.
“You sure you have a job?” she thinks.
“Ooh, ooh, this is what I do!” pointing at this video.
Overall pretty good. 👍
Many argue modern Nuke Subs are THE most sophisticated weapon system we got. I agree with your assessment that Aircraft carriers are more complex.
I never understood why we spend so much on such a big target for our submarines...
They each have their place . The submarine operates deep underwater, which is called a hostile environment . That is truly the big difference.
A submarine with carrier level fire projection makes me feel ways about stuff.
Worked for a company back in the mid 90's that sold a very special machine to the USN. It had to do with rubber extrusion. A government rep was there to watch 100% of the manufacturing process, until the machine shipped out in an unmarked tractor trailer. It was special because of being made of aluminum, so it would be easier to move about.
The new Virginia class submarine is the most likely choice to attack surface vessels, if they were to use the newest platforms, but the LA class subs and seawolf class are still potent and capable platforms
Big point most people miss is that AT BEST only 6 will be forward deployed at any given time. The other half or more will be either training at sea or in a yard period.
In peacetime.
Old Navy guy here the Ohio class Trident II D5 is capable of carrying 14 warheads but up to now has been bound by treaty to only 8 warheads.
Fun fact!
Less MIRV = More Range
@@Michael-ij6kg Fewer, not less.
Each warhead carries multiple launch vehicles .
Why are you talking about this?
@@JO-xt3om Why not? Cappy was mistaken in saying that the UGM-133A Trident II D5 only carried 4 warheads, is capable of carrying 14 warheads but up to now has been bound by treaty to only 8 warheads.
with 24 missile tubes on the Ohio's that means they could carry 336 re-entry vehicles, now they have never done that, but they carry 24x8=192 warheads. That is why we are talking about it.
Not needing to be refilled for its entire life is simply amazing.
Chris: New Carissa wasn't a tanker. She was a bulk cargo freighter (think grain and the like). She was running "in ballast" - empty -at the time she ran aground. The oil she leak was from her engine fuel tanks (and a hell of a bunch of it). A High School classmate of mine was in charge of the tow company that finally dragged her off the beach.
Since you did the Columbia class is it possible for you to do Britains equivalent the Dreadnaught class (very nice for Ur first naval video)
That is a lot of money
I served on the USS Alexander Hamilton ssbn617 an old boat by today's standard but an amazing piece of machinery .
The whole idea of a BG is to have your own sub/s watching out for the enemy subs. Any ship, including aircraft carriers, are targets for enemy subs. If I were the CNO my main concern right up there with enough carriers, would be enough subs to protect them. I would want at least 2 if not 3 or 4 attack subs with each CV BG.
They do always have at least 1 sometimes 2 within a battle group. They just don't have enough subs for 3 or 4 to hang out with carriers. There's only 22 Virginia class subs plus whatever we got left of Los Angeles class ones which are being retired almost yearly. 11 carrier battle groups only gives you 2 Virginia class subs per group. Attack subs are also used to hunt and follow other enemy subs, ships, etc. separately so you'd sort of be wasting subs by assigning them to groups in such numbers.
@@gigakrait5648 Your post is right on the money. My post is about what I would want as CNO but I never will be that, so it's pie in the sky wishing on my part.
I just realized we have been quasi fighting thermonuclear war for the past few decades. Because it's such a short conflict all your assets must be deployed from the start and it could start at any moment such that all of humanity is maintaining a constant holding pattern characteristic of minutes before a war is waged. Similar to how the Japanese fleet was deployed minutes before the Pearl Harbor attack.
Now think about how back in the 50s before we had the missiles, we kept B52s in the air all the time for the same reason.
All the money wasted on Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Ukraine, instead of R&D.
@@hyokkim7726Money wasted in Ukraine? Are you drunk? We just set Russia back well over a decade and didn't lose a single American to accomplish it. Russia is still respected as a nuclear power but NATO now has zero concerns about a conventional Russian invasion. Worth every penny to figure out that Russia was a paper tiger
@@rayzerot It's debatable how much long term damage that may have done to Russia. They have expanded their industrial capacity many times in most war goods, while also seeming to figure out workarounds with the chip export bans. They also increased their army from 1 to 1.5 million not including mobilized troops. So far the war has put big stress on Russia but not nearly as much as expected, so they've adapted. What you describe are debatable viewpoints because it's not exactly that clear how much Russia will suffer. It DID prevent them from expanding further in Ukraine but i don't know how much it hurts them as a whole (you see the difference?). This war has turned out very differently than the Soviet experience in Afghanistan.
@@Knight_KinTanks (2290, of which destroyed: 1482, damaged: 129, abandoned: 132, captured: 549)
Armoured Fighting Vehicles (964, of which destroyed: 634, damaged: 26, abandoned: 37, captured: 267)
Infantry Fighting Vehicles (2741, of which destroyed: 1873, damaged: 110, abandoned: 145, captured: 612)
Armoured Personnel Carriers (349, of which destroyed: 234, damaged: 9, abandoned: 15, captured: 91)
Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) Vehicles (47, of which destroyed: 33, damaged: 4, abandoned: 1, captured: 9)
Infantry Mobility Vehicles (205, of which destroyed: 146, damaged: 6, abandoned: 2, captured: 51)
Command Posts And Communications Stations (250, of which destroyed: 163, damaged: 2, abandoned: 2, captured: 83)
Engineering Vehicles And Equipment (340, of which destroyed: 168, damaged: 9, abandoned: 38, captured: 125)
Self-Propelled Anti-Tank Missile Systems (41, of which destroyed: 17, damaged: 1, abandoned: 4, captured: 19)
Artillery Support Vehicles And Equipment (107, of which destroyed: 53, abandoned: 2, captured: 52)
Towed Artillery (296, of which destroyed: 169, damaged: 26, abandoned: 5, captured: 96)
Self-Propelled Artillery (512, of which destroyed: 368, damaged: 30, abandoned: 7, captured: 107)
Multiple Rocket Launchers (262, of which destroyed: 192, damaged: 16, abandoned: 2, captured: 52)
Anti-Aircraft Guns (17, of which destroyed: 3, captured: 14)
Self-Propelled Anti-Aircraft Guns (25, of which destroyed: 14, damaged: 1, abandoned: 2, captured: 8)
Surface-To-Air Missile Systems (151, of which destroyed: 102, damaged: 21, abandoned: 4, captured: 24)
Radars (45, of which destroyed: 29, damaged: 4, captured: 9)
Jammers And Deception Systems (54, of which destroyed: 41, damaged: 6, captured: 7)
Aircraft (89, of which destroyed: 81, damaged: 8)
Helicopters (105, of which destroyed: 91, damaged: 12, captured: 2)
Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicles (14, of which destroyed: 11, captured: 3)
Reconnaissance Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (284, of which destroyed: 161, captured: 123)
Naval Ships (14, of which destroyed: 9, damaged: 5)
Trucks, Vehicles, and Jeeps (2804, of which destroyed: 2128, damaged: 51, abandoned: 51, captured: 569)
Infantry: ~120,000 killed,
170,000-180,000 wounded
Lieutenant Generals: 2
Major Generals: 8
Colonels: 44
Lieutenant Colonels: 98
Majors: 193
Captains: 279
Senior Lieutenants: 471
Lieutenants: 235
Suspicious deaths of high-profile Russians: 46
Long-term emigration: ~817,000-922,000 (~80% college educated, ~100,000 IT workers)
Ruble: Lost 25% of value despite extraordinary measures taken
Money transfered abroad: $41.5 billion
NATO: Expanded to the northern border and fully encircles the Baltic.
Russia has exactly one (1) tank factory that produces around 20 T-90Ms a month. Ukraine destroys around 150 in that time. Roughly 3/4 of Russia's pre-war tanks have been destroyed.
Russia built 27 combat aircraft in 2022 (4 Su-30SM2s, 10 Su-34Ms, 7 Su-35Ss, 6 Su-57s) Ukraine destroyed around 100 in that time.
Nothing I put here is debatable. Russia is so unbelievably forked it's not even funny.
I missed your 1m mark. It is really impressive how hard you work and how far you have come.
"Oh neat, I'm anywhere in the world" 😂
Seriously love your sense of humor and delivery!
Just a small note - deterrence doesnt work in "accidental" situations. That is, if one side feels that they are under attack but the cause is a misunderstood accident (sensor errors, accidental detentions, subs gone missing, etc.) - they may launch. there were a few close calls during the cold war, and even after. One was that Yeltsin almost launched - when we were all getting along - because a Norwegian rocket launch was assessed as a SLBM launch. Related to this - if there is a misreading of a situation in Moscow today, how long will Putin wait before launching? This isn't even a question of rationality - it is entirely rational to think one is under nuclear attack if that is what the sensors say, or if there has been a nuclear detonation at a sensitive strategic nuclear site (like the Thule Air Base incident, where a series of events could have destroyed the early warning site and the B-52 backup in the air).
hi, Australia here. can you lend us a couple of Ohio class until we get ours in about 20 years? the dimple like effect on the hull also reduces drag like dimples on a golf ball.
Right! You all need them quicker than anyone. Besides Japan and South Korea you are a main target of China. I hope my(USA) government hurries up and delivers your subs. Hopefully we are training your navy guys already on the platform.
Why do you guys need submarines when you're a land-locked country - what are you going to do, put them in your Alpine lakes? Also how would you get them there, are you planning to sail them to Trieste and then transport them through Italy or Slovenia by road? 😜
@@trolleriffic Wrong country.
OK, are you american? hate to tell you this but Australia (not Austria!) is not land locked. it is an F'ing big island! go buy a world map. @@trolleriffic
@@williamhardes8081 Would an American confused about geography know that the nearest major port to Austria is Trieste? I thought I'd made it as obvious as I could that I was joking, but that's the problem with written communication!
Proper term for submariner is Bubblehead while surface crews are skimmers and their ships are simply referred to as targets
I have a photo of a cruiser taken through a U.S. submarine periscope!
and naval aviators are airdales
@@HomercidalOne at least they get to be dogs, vs airy fairys for air farce
Used to be "Surface Pukes" by the Bubbleheads.
The Ohio class Submarines were not supposed to be refueled either when they were initially designed and commissioned. I know as I helped figure out how to refuel them after they had already been in service for years and their replacements were not ready.
Former submariner...no the Navy would not use an SSBN (boomer) boat to deter adversaries. That's the job of Fast Attack boats (Los Angeles/Virginia/Seawolf class). SSBNs typically try to stay completely undetected and within an operating area as a part of the US strategic nuclear capability. They have weapons onboard in the event they need to defend themselves, but not for any hunter-killer operations and certainly not for battlegroup support.
Also, the rest of the story of the USS Louisville (SSN724), after it had been the first to fire vertically launched tomahawk missiles in the Gulf War, then got their deployment extended 8 months to fire more missiles, they finally came home conquering heroes only to be met before reaching the pier by a small boat with an ORSE team on board, turned back out to sea and promptly did poorly on the ORSE causing the nukes to lose their post-deployment liberty. Because to the Navy, Naval Reactors comes before both God and Country.
The "we only need 8 subs" argument fails to consider that the US might have most of them stuck in port waiting for maintenance (like the UK) or offline for a year because of the Navy ramming subs into undersea mountains.
Those mountains need to get da fuq out da way. Murica is coming thru!
Theyre only doing that because theres no immediate need for more of them at sea. If we go war, that number goes up.
@@Russo-Delenda-Est Yeah, that doesn't work. You would be surpised how many times that has happened.
They are putting bigger bumpers on the new models.
You should talk about the new unmanned subs they have those are actually a really big game changer
They will be great in the game of deception.
The first Nuclear powered sub to ever sink another ship in combat was the HMS Conquerer Churchill class in 1982 when it sank the Belgrano.
Cappy you're the best! Thanks for the well researched info while making me laugh!
Another reason to go from 41 to 14 missile subs is they went from 16 missile tubes to 24 missile tubes - 1/3 more per sub. That's almost gaining another 5 subs equating to 19 missile boats.
Polaris was also originally a single-warhead missile (A1), only changing to three warheads in multiple re-entry vehicles (MRVs - not MIRVs because they weren't individually targeted) with the upgrade to the A3 missile, going from 16 warheads per boat to 48. The Polaris A1 and its W47 warhead were also horrendously unreliable, with the missile having a 50% failure rate and 75% of the warheads found to be defective or inoperable when it was withdrawn from service in 1966. Out of 16 warheads on each of the "41 For Freedom" boats, only 2 could be expected to reach their targets and explode successfully so the entire fleet was only likely to have around 82 functional warheads between them which is less than a single Ohio or Columbia Class boat.
At around 3:15 timestamp you say that The TRIDENT II missile on the Ohio class submarines can only carry 4 or 5 nuclear warheads. In fact, the original Trident II (D5) missile could carry up to 12 W76 - MK4 nuclear warheads or eight W88-MK 5 warheads. Changes to the front-end missile configuration have been made to streamline missile processing and reduce overall man-hours for configuration support and weapons maintainability over time. The D5 Life Extension missile currently can carry up to eight nuclear warheads regardless of type used by the program. The more warheads installed will equate to distance delivery reduction (max missile range) when reduced below the break-even threshold weight for lift capability. That break-even issue is tied to the need to burn out all three solid boost rockets before releasing the warhead delivery bus during suborbital flight and the maximum range is tied to power delivery capability of the missile internal power system needed to control the missile and release the warheads. Up to this point the Life Extension Triden II (D5) missile is the most capable and maintainable long range nuclear delivery system produced by the United States military program. But of course, the new Land Based Strategic Missile System under current development might change all of that.
Summertime on the Puget Sound. Salmon runs. Crab traps. Shrimp pots. And soooo many small boats that the big subs would run on top to keep from hitting something.
i took a tour of ohio class vessel years ago, when vendors were invited aboard. it was in bangor, wa, or naval undersea warfare center, i forget. awesome! they showed us a ribbon across the hull in a part of the ship, and described how much it would sag when the boat was submerged. crazy! many of us got to sit in the chairs on the bridge, and look around
I got to sit in the captain's chair of the most advanced machine ever created. It has traveled further than anything else, out to where no man has gone before.
@@actionjksn You mean your toilet at home 😉
@@Peter_Enis No I don't mean that at all. I sat in the captain's chair from the USS Enterprise NC-1701. The same chair that Captain James Tiberius Kirk sat in for many deep space missions.
Thats alot of subs.
Hey T&P, the DC class will be replacing the Ohios. While they'll have Missile Tubes, they won't carry conventional weapons, as that isn't their purpose. The Block 5 of the Virginia Class will carry the conventional munitions as the replacement for the SSGNs, and all other SSNs have Vertical Launch System capabilities to shoot Tomahawks.
My concern is that some spies might gain access to the information that could compromise the location of our subs and, given the smaller number of them, it would make it easier to destroy them.
I tend to think that all the Pentagon and other interested land-based parties know about a SLBM sub's location is that of a fairly large region of the ocean. The submarine's captain and navigation officers should have independent discretion as to their precise location in the region. In an emergency they have buoys to signal their location to rescue services.
@@timtrewyn453 You are correct. The only ones who know where a 'boomer' is, other than 'somewhere in this region' are the captain and navigator of the sub.
Walmart employee would be a good name for a sub. I can never find one of them?
@@Jaycren86nice joke
Nobody on a sub know where they are for this reason. 😂
@taskandpurpose. I am not sure launching Camrys, even millions of them, at our enemies is quite the deterrent you think it is.
imagine a massive fleet of millions of Camry's modified for amphibious operations , covering like the whole horizon. No one would dare fight back.
sure as hell not with that attitude.
@@Taskandpurpose don't camrys sorta float already? Besides, if rush hour traffic makes us shudder the sight of that many camrys should illicit immediate surrender.
@@Taskandpurpose oh, a fleet of them? I thought he meant launching them through the air because any mid sized automobile dropping on your home town would be absolutely terrifying. The French would surrender before you even pulled the trigger. Or finished the catapult for that matter.
3:50 "24,0901 miles" damn earth huge
At 10:48 does he really say "hear'd" instead of "heard" lmao
I would much prefer if they didn't tell everyone about how good this new sub is, withhold open source information and work harder at stopping all the designs being stolen by the other side ( you know who I mean). No one needs to know about it, period. Interesting video all the same. 👤
i agree. nothing is safe anymore. all the enemy needs to do is comb our social media and they will have their answer.
Raycon ear buds only last a year before they stop charging. Bought one pair lasted a year and sent back. Got the replacement pair and lasted a year. Switched brands after.
There is a vid debunking them on YT
That’s a Mk48 adcap. Built different.
Submarines do not spend their whole lives at sea. They go out for 90 days they come back then the other crew will get the boat ready to go back out on patrol and they will spend 90 days on patrol approximately. Then you have extended overhauls which may take submarine out of the water for a couple years. That assumes you have no major equipment casualties in the meantime. You have to figure 1/3 of your submarines at sea, 1/3 your submarines pier side getting ready to go to see or having just returned, the other third of your submarines are in various stages of maintenance. Maintenance could mean a full dry docking in major overhaul or routine mainrenance. Personally given the rotation cycle in and out of maintenance I think 21 submarines would be ideal.
Yay, new upload!
So they're not $132 billion each then.
_Yet_
Love that highly detailed artist rendering.
I always thought the saying should be: "Worldwide delivery guaranteed in 30 minutes or least!"
Australia was misspelt. We've been veteran buddies for over a hundred years, Your 1st Marine division ships out to the song Waltzing Matilda! You think someone could have spelt our name right! You know I'm making sad Aussie Vet noises about that 😐 Other than this, great video 😉
Don’t take it personally….he added an extra digit to the circumference of the earth. It’s part of his charm!
@@bpdp379 😅 It's all good. Cappy is pretty much the only Average Infantryman that does include us in all these developments 😊
You had me rolling the whole time. Thank you for all the effort you put into your vids
Much love from California
The mk48 torpedo is a very capable weapon, if one is launched against you they are very difficult to escape. During our war games we always got the surface ship we were after and never were found.
Put it this way: Now that we are in the 2nd Cold War, we need to buy new nuclear insurance.
What's long, hard and full of seamen?
Every navy sailors boot sock.
@@InterstellarTaco : LMFAO