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?

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.

@@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.

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.

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.

😂😂😂

Fun fact: after Toto released his song south Pangea liked it so much they split and created a country named Africa

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".

😂😂😂😂😂

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.

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.

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.

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.

Thank you for your service 🇺🇸

Has always been will always be because of our geography.

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.

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.

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”.

100% agree.

“A triangle… my favorite shape of deterrence.” Just as good, in my view.

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.)

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.

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?

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.

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

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.

Nukes are a lie.

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.

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.

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 !!!!!

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.

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"

@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…

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 🤔

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.

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.

In peacetime.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

They will be great in the game of deception.

Its not the waters of the US a Fast Attack protects, its killing enemy vessels, be it sub or surface and in THEIR waters

You don't need fast submarines, you're not going to be using the top speed all the time. Only on specific cases. You want quiet and moderately fast.

@@M16_Akula-III I was referring to the class of submarine. The Virginia Class is referred to as a fast-attack submarine which I think is how the US classifies their Hunter-Killer submarines.

The Block III Virginia submarine is more than capable of seeking and destroying 99% of the world's submarine fleet. And besides if you think Russian and Chinese ports don't have a American submarine watching them, you better rethink your life

Depends on whether Russian missile subs ever leave their bastions. The US will probably have to send attack subs in to Russian waters to take out their boomers.

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.

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. 😂

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.

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!

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.

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.

That’s awesome I was excited to see the building he showed at the beginning was the new building in groton that I worked on for a year. It’s part of Electric boats expansion project so they may be needing more parts from you soon !

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.

Every navy sailors boot sock.

@@InterstellarTaco : LMFAO