What is the strategic argument for building submarines as opposed to other defence systems , eg long range missiles in underground bunkers in Northern Australia ?

rumpole said:

What is the strategic argument for building submarines as opposed to other defence systems , eg long range missiles in underground bunkers in Northern Australia ?

All defence systems have vulnerabilities.

we’re good with subs. they are a long range surveillance platform more than anything else.

rumpole said:

What is the strategic argument for building submarines as opposed to other defence systems , eg long range missiles in underground bunkers in Northern Australia ?

Subs are an intelligence platform as well as being able to protect a naval force and act singly as a deterrant. Long range missiles are not able to replace any of the roles a sub performs.

roughbarked said:

rumpole said:

What is the strategic argument for building submarines as opposed to other defence systems , eg long range missiles in underground bunkers in Northern Australia ?

All defence systems have vulnerabilities.

All of them require maintenance

CrazyNeutrino said:

roughbarked said:

rumpole said:

What is the strategic argument for building submarines as opposed to other defence systems , eg long range missiles in underground bunkers in Northern Australia ?

All defence systems have vulnerabilities.

All of them require maintenance

All of them cost money. Sorry, I thought this was the stating the bleeding obvious room.

AwesomeO said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

roughbarked said:

All defence systems have vulnerabilities.

All of them require maintenance

All of them cost money. Sorry, I thought this was the stating the bleeding obvious room.

they do cost money and if you can get the same thing or better for less cost then its also obvious to do that

what is good is making new defense systems as flexible as possible, to make them easily upgradable, and take less time to do it

what is also good is make defense systems of the army, navy and air-force to easily communicate with each other but these all appear obvious as well

what does concern me though is sexual harassment in the forces

this is a distraction which we don’t need and creates its own vulnerabilities

we need happy troops not stressed out ones due to sexual harassment

stamp out sexual harassment and you have stronger forces

lets keep this thread on topic CN and not your pet hobbyhorse eh?

Do you know anything about how the armed services operate?

ChrispenEvan said:

lets keep this thread on topic CN and not your pet hobbyhorse eh?

Do you know anything about how the armed services operate?

bring on the negativity

CrazyNeutrino said:

ChrispenEvan said:

lets keep this thread on topic CN and not your pet hobbyhorse eh?

Do you know anything about how the armed services operate?

bring on the negativity

humans operate all the defensive systems don’t they

CrazyNeutrino said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

ChrispenEvan said:

lets keep this thread on topic CN and not your pet hobbyhorse eh?

Do you know anything about how the armed services operate?

bring on the negativity

humans operate all the defensive systems don’t they

Do I need a PhD. in it?

rumpole said:

What is the strategic argument for building submarines as opposed to other defence systems , eg long range missiles in underground bunkers in Northern Australia ?

I’ve never known a long range missile to be skilled in the art of negotiation.

“If you have to thump them you lose points”, Steve Perry.

For Australia, submarines need long range, and that eliminates diesel. Australia needs to retrofit Collins Class submarines with nuclear power engines.

CrazyNeutrino said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

bring on the negativity

humans operate all the defensive systems don’t they

Do I need a PhD. in it?

what ?

do some people want to keep sexual harassment in the armed forces?

for what reason?

mollwollfumble said:

rumpole said:

What is the strategic argument for building submarines as opposed to other defence systems , eg long range missiles in underground bunkers in Northern Australia ?

I’ve never known a long range missile to be skilled in the art of negotiation.

“If you have to thump them you lose points”, Steve Perry.

For Australia, submarines need long range, and that eliminates diesel. Australia needs to retrofit Collins Class submarines with nuclear power engines.

that makes sense

will they do it though

CrazyNeutrino said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

humans operate all the defensive systems don’t they

Do I need a PhD. in it?

what ?

do some people want to keep sexual harassment in the armed forces?

for what reason?

this thread is about submarines and defence options. Start a new thread if you seriously want to discuss sexual harassment in the armed forces. It’s a worthy topic.

Arts said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

Do I need a PhD. in it?

what ?

do some people want to keep sexual harassment in the armed forces?

for what reason?

this thread is about submarines and defence options. Start a new thread if you seriously want to discuss sexual harassment in the armed forces. It’s a worthy topic.

havent you read the papers

the military suffers from sexual harassment

people males and females in the armed forces operate these defensive systems

eliminate sexual haresmant in the armed forces and you have a stronger armed force

if no one can see that

STICK YOU HEAD IN THE SAND

PEOPLE OPERATE DEFENSIVE SYSTEMS

ARGH,

How about I piss off from the forum altogether

mollwollfumble said:

rumpole said:

What is the strategic argument for building submarines as opposed to other defence systems , eg long range missiles in underground bunkers in Northern Australia ?

I’ve never known a long range missile to be skilled in the art of negotiation.

“If you have to thump them you lose points”, Steve Perry.

For Australia, submarines need long range, and that eliminates diesel. Australia needs to retrofit Collins Class submarines with nuclear power engines.

I am betting that would be pretty impossible, or at best incredible expensive. It wouldn’t be like replacing a six cylinder with a V8 in an engine bay.

i would think so too. nuke boats are a lot bigger. plus i can’t see us going down that road as we don’t have the shore based infrastructure to support them.

mollwollfumble said:

rumpole said:

What is the strategic argument for building submarines as opposed to other defence systems , eg long range missiles in underground bunkers in Northern Australia ?

I’ve never known a long range missile to be skilled in the art of negotiation.

“If you have to thump them you lose points”, Steve Perry.

For Australia, submarines need long range, and that eliminates diesel. Australia needs to retrofit Collins Class submarines with nuclear power engines.

Isn’t the issue about deterrent and best value for money ?

Subs can be sunk, and they are mainly just mobile missile platforms anyway. Sure they have a surveillance capability, but so do drones that cost a fraction of the subs..

You can hide a lot of missiles underground.

CrazyNeutrino said:

Arts said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

what ?

do some people want to keep sexual harassment in the armed forces?

for what reason?

this thread is about submarines and defence options. Start a new thread if you seriously want to discuss sexual harassment in the armed forces. It’s a worthy topic.

havent you read the papers

the military suffers from sexual harassment

people males and females in the armed forces operate these defensive systems

eliminate sexual haresmant in the armed forces and you have a stronger armed force

if no one can see that

STICK YOU HEAD IN THE SAND

PEOPLE OPERATE DEFENSIVE SYSTEMS

ARGH,

so, your strategic argument for building submarines as opposed to other defence systems is to take sexual harassment out of the military?

ChrispenEvan said:

i would think so too. nuke boats are a lot bigger. plus i can’t see us going down that road as we don’t have the shore based infrastructure to support them.

Cooling and shielding would be the big problems I imagine. Shore based infrastructure can be built, the bigger problem is a political one of upsetting ferals, hippies and the latte sippers. A lease arrangement for American or British facilities would not be impossible and would be cheaper for us and defray some of their costs.

rumpole said:

mollwollfumble said:

rumpole said:

What is the strategic argument for building submarines as opposed to other defence systems , eg long range missiles in underground bunkers in Northern Australia ?

I’ve never known a long range missile to be skilled in the art of negotiation.

“If you have to thump them you lose points”, Steve Perry.

For Australia, submarines need long range, and that eliminates diesel. Australia needs to retrofit Collins Class submarines with nuclear power engines.

Isn’t the issue about deterrent and best value for money ?

Subs can be sunk, and they are mainly just mobile missile platforms anyway. Sure they have a surveillance capability, but so do drones that cost a fraction of the subs..

You can hide a lot of missiles underground.

There are no drones that can do what subs are doing.

AwesomeO said:

rumpole said:

mollwollfumble said:

I’ve never known a long range missile to be skilled in the art of negotiation.

“If you have to thump them you lose points”, Steve Perry.

For Australia, submarines need long range, and that eliminates diesel. Australia needs to retrofit Collins Class submarines with nuclear power engines.

Isn’t the issue about deterrent and best value for money ?

Subs can be sunk, and they are mainly just mobile missile platforms anyway. Sure they have a surveillance capability, but so do drones that cost a fraction of the subs..

You can hide a lot of missiles underground.

There are no drones that can do what subs are doing.

So what are they doing, and how are they doing it ?

I’m not arguing for or against any system, I’d just like to know the basics.

lay off the coast of someplace and listen i guess would be one job.

ChrispenEvan said:

lay off the coast of someplace and listen i guess would be one job.

Yes. shielding and secrecy are useful.

rumpole said:

AwesomeO said:

rumpole said:

Isn’t the issue about deterrent and best value for money ?

Subs can be sunk, and they are mainly just mobile missile platforms anyway. Sure they have a surveillance capability, but so do drones that cost a fraction of the subs..

You can hide a lot of missiles underground.

There are no drones that can do what subs are doing.

So what are they doing, and how are they doing it ?

I’m not arguing for or against any system, I’d just like to know the basics.

Really quickly, I am on my way out, they can tap underground cables, they can place surveillance equipment, they can loiter at test ranges and gather telemetry and recover debris, they can loiter and pick up radars and microwave transmissions, they can photograph shore systems and land troops to reconnoiter and recover, they can gather Information on other subs and ships. They are the best form of defence against another sub, they are a force multiplier In that an enemy has to double up on everything because they can only assume a submarine is present, they can do long range patrols and control boxes of ocean near an enemy’s ports, they can blockade or surveille sea lanes and they are one of the few things that a carrier group is afraid of.

> Isn’t the issue about deterrent …

Hell no.

>For Australia, submarines need long range, and that eliminates diesel. Australia needs to retrofit Collins Class submarines with nuclear power engines.

not holding my breath

>>I am betting that would be pretty impossible, or at best incredible expensive. It wouldn’t be like replacing a six cylinder with a V8 in an engine bay.

this has been done for a long time

rumpole said:

You can hide a lot of missiles underground.

I don’t think you can. With modern surveillance by satellite everyone is going to know where they are.

party_pants said:

rumpole said:

You can hide a lot of missiles underground.

I don’t think you can. With modern surveillance by satellite everyone is going to know where they are.

More expensive to move around than a submarine too.

subs

basically two types

hunter killer vessels: Knocks out ocean going vessels

missile platforms : submarine is primarily a nuclear deterrent , sails out and waits for instructions

subs: hard to find and stay found unless you have hydrophones everywhere or specialised equipment.

Australia has no deterrent system against first world powers when it comes to a retaliatory strike

in the event of an invasion or attack Australian subs would run out of options fairly quickly due to the need for diesel, the enemy would simply wait for a few weeks / months and then sail the high seas with impunity. that’s assuming that some subs were indeed operational at all. Australian sub building didn’t actively look for saboteurs within its construction, who knows what lines of code could have been inserted into its computers? it is no mistake that billions of dollars became wasted on something that couldn’t work

land based missile systems

easier to find , those that are mobile are harder to find, you should never build solid concrete structures to house them , the enemy knows where they are. though the wookiemeister defence strategy would involved thousands of such smaller installations possibly just inserted into a hole and sealed up and camouflaged – in the event of an attack the enemy would be bombarded by swarms of solid fuel ICBMs with conventional warheads knocking out thousands of installations on the enemy side – mainly power and water. military sites would be hit with FABs this will kill the personnel needed to maintain the bombers they might use against us, it could hit key structures on military sites.

If the enemy stupidly decides to make temporary airfields this will leave the personnel in a more precarious situation – canvas tents will be no protection against FABs no matter what anyone tells you here.

land based systems are viable if they can be cheap, built in great numbers and have accuracy

you don’t need nuclear weapons to have an effect

the ICBMs would just go through their own diagnostics and move control systems once in a while

you’d probably need it to check its memory now and then

everything might be solid state when it comes to memory

you’d need a production line of these things

they could also to used to attack any naval force trying to land troops, FABs used on a beachfront invasion would quickly , cheaply knock the wind out of any such attack.

the ICBMs would just go through their own diagnostics and move control systems once in a while

you’d probably need it to check its memory now and then

everything might be solid state when it comes to memory

you’d need a production line of these things

they could also to used to attack any naval force trying to land troops, FABs used on a beachfront invasion would quickly , cheaply knock the wind out of any such attack.

from an invasion point of view, it’s unlikely china would attack , there’s way too much invested in property and rental markets. a war work bone any hope of return on these investments , I don’t see an invasion from any world power.

as invasions go it will mostly be soft power , religious / ideological invasion , few if any defences against that.

as the job market gets worse you’ll probably see more conversions to Islam or other groups other than the mainstream – Britain had been kicking its native population in the face since the 1970s the result ? conversions to other religions and home grown terrorism. you need a sustained attack on the population though to provoke long lasting effects. few people convert to another religion without some catastrophic ( most likely financial ) event.

an attack on the welfare / education system brings its own rewards

Australian society is devolving to main groups such LNP – the army, “business” that pays little tax. taxation increases on the working class and those unable to offset their tax. principle hates: working class earning good money. “Labor” – centrelink, taxation on the working class. if the working class become unemployed labor becomes stronger .

it’s a runaway train both political groups hate the working class earning good money, sure, the unions might be able to bargain more wages but how will that help you if taxes are already out of control and inflation is rampant ?

politics and the military are entwined , it was a political decision to build defensive walls from Piraeus to Athens for example that provoked the pelopennsian war for example.

any smaller state fighting a defensive war against a larger state either has to inflict massive losses on the enemy troops or take down the political process of the larger state.

Submarines are primarily intelligence gathering platforms and they do this better than missiles

Dropbear said:

Submarines are primarily intelligence gathering platforms and they do this better than missiles

That’s certainly the case for attack submarines but don’t missile subs spend most of their time hiding?

Witty Rejoinder said:

Dropbear said:

Submarines are primarily intelligence gathering platforms and they do this better than missiles

That’s certainly the case for attack submarines but don’t missile subs spend most of their time hiding?

Yeh but we don’t have missile subs :)

>Summer or no summer, I’ve got the heater on. Chilly evening & steady rain

I could have got fire going lastnight, turned oven gas burners on

transition said:

>Summer or no summer, I’ve got the heater on. Chilly evening & steady rain

I could have got fire going lastnight, turned oven gas burners on

Fires are dangerous in submarines

Dropbear said:

Fires are dangerous in submarines

They ain’t a laugh a minute in surface ships, either.

captain_spalding said:

Dropbear said:

Fires are dangerous in submarines

They ain’t a laugh a minute in surface ships, either.

Also they are dangerous straight up in your arse.

transition said:

>For Australia, submarines need long range, and that eliminates diesel. Australia needs to retrofit Collins Class submarines with nuclear power engines.

not holding my breath

>>I am betting that would be pretty impossible, or at best incredible expensive. It wouldn’t be like replacing a six cylinder with a V8 in an engine bay.

this has been done for a long time

I am guessing you missed the wouldnt.

mollwollfumble said:

rumpole said:

What is the strategic argument for building submarines as opposed to other defence systems , eg long range missiles in underground bunkers in Northern Australia ?

I’ve never known a long range missile to be skilled in the art of negotiation.

“If you have to thump them you lose points”, Steve Perry.

For Australia, submarines need long range, and that eliminates diesel. Australia needs to retrofit Collins Class submarines with nuclear power engines.

It’s not very far to Indonesia..

I think the shenanigans that subs get up to was illustrated when that Malaysian plane went down somewhere in the ocean and a British sub was in the area and assisted in the search. You can bet they were not on the other side of the world in an empty ocean for a jolly trip.

Dropbear said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Dropbear said:

Submarines are primarily intelligence gathering platforms and they do this better than missiles

That’s certainly the case for attack submarines but don’t missile subs spend most of their time hiding?

Yeh but we don’t have missile subs :)

What, what’s the good of them then.
During the gulf smackdowns the Yanks and the Poms had subs in the Med shooting off cruise missiles that could fly through windows in Baghdad.
If you just want intelligent gathering the old Oberons could do that ok.
If I’m going to pay an arm and a leg for new submarines they better have some fire power, some rockets and misiles and things that can go bang thousands of miles away.

Rolf Harris, Bill Cosby, who’s next – Noni Hazlehurst?

AwesomeO said:

I think the shenanigans that subs get up to was illustrated when that Malaysian plane went down somewhere in the ocean and a British sub was in the area and assisted in the search. You can bet they were not on the other side of the world in an empty ocean for a jolly trip.

Based in BIOT?

Bubblecar said:

Rolf Harris, Bill Cosby, who’s next – Noni Hazlehurst?

Um, not here.

Bubblecar said:

Rolf Harris, Bill Cosby, who’s next – Noni Hazlehurst?

Submarines?

Dropbear said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Dropbear said:

Submarines are primarily intelligence gathering platforms and they do this better than missiles

That’s certainly the case for attack submarines but don’t missile subs spend most of their time hiding?

Yeh but we don’t have missile subs :)

nor missiles

dv said:

AwesomeO said:

I think the shenanigans that subs get up to was illustrated when that Malaysian plane went down somewhere in the ocean and a British sub was in the area and assisted in the search. You can bet they were not on the other side of the world in an empty ocean for a jolly trip.

Based in BIOT?

What’s BIOT?

Yes, I am pretty sure Noni is tied up in this submarine business somehow.

dv said:

Yes, I am pretty sure Noni is tied up in this submarine business somehow.

Sailors are always going do….. Um.. Probably wrong thread

AwesomeO said:

dv said:

AwesomeO said:

I think the shenanigans that subs get up to was illustrated when that Malaysian plane went down somewhere in the ocean and a British sub was in the area and assisted in the search. You can bet they were not on the other side of the world in an empty ocean for a jolly trip.

Based in BIOT?

What’s BIOT?

British Indian Ocean Territory. Diego Garcia and that.

dv said:

AwesomeO said:

dv said:

Based in BIOT?

What’s BIOT?

British Indian Ocean Territory. Diego Garcia and that.

Maybe cept subs don’t usually do the flag waving trips, they like secure harbours. I remember at the time looking at a map and wondering what the hell is it doing out there. But yeah, may have been an innocent transit for a flag waving brief or a crew jolly.

i thought the rolf reference was alluding to his song…six white boomers.

Still, you’d want to think hard.

This new fleet is supposed to cost something like 85 billion dollars. For that kind of money you could build the NBN and still have enough for high speed rail from Sydney to Melbourne: lasting infrastructure investments. You wouldn’t want to commit to buying a new batch of subs because you’re pretty sure you might need them one day.

dv said:

Still, you’d want to think hard.

This new fleet is supposed to cost something like 85 billion dollars. For that kind of money you could build the NBN and still have enough for high speed rail from Sydney to Melbourne: lasting infrastructure investments. You wouldn’t want to commit to buying a new batch of subs because you’re pretty sure you might need them one day.

What would you do
If you were asked to give up your dreams for freedom?
What would you do
If asked to make the ultimate sacrifice?

Would you think about all them people
Who gave up everything they had?
Would you think about all them War Vets
And would you start to feel bad?

Freedom isn’t free
It costs folks like you and me
And if we don’t all chip in
We’ll never pay that bill
Freedom isn’t free
No, there’s a hefty in’ fee.
And if you don’t throw in your buck ‘o five
Who will?

What would you do
If someone told you to fight for freedom
Would you answer the call
Or run away like a little pussy
‘Cause the only reason that you’re here
Is ‘cause folks died for you in the past
So maybe now it’s your turn
To die kicking some ass

Freedom isn’t free
It costs folks like you and me
And if we don’t all chip in
We’ll never pay that bill
Freedom isn’t free
Now there’s a hefty in’ fee
And if you don’t throw in your buck ‘o five
Who will?

You don’t throw in your buck ‘o five. Who will?
Oooh buck ‘o five
Freedom costs a buck ‘o five

dv said:

Still, you’d want to think hard.

This new fleet is supposed to cost something like 85 billion dollars. For that kind of money you could build the NBN and still have enough for high speed rail from Sydney to Melbourne: lasting infrastructure investments. You wouldn’t want to commit to buying a new batch of subs because you’re pretty sure you might need them one day.

Or treat like like an insurance policy. Leopard tanks and F-111s were never used in anger and there is a lot more utility in a sub.

dv said:

Still, you’d want to think hard.

This new fleet is supposed to cost something like 85 billion dollars. For that kind of money you could build the NBN and still have enough for high speed rail from Sydney to Melbourne: lasting infrastructure investments. You wouldn’t want to commit to buying a new batch of subs because you’re pretty sure you might need them one day.

We hopefulise that any investment in new military hardware is never needed.

dv said:

Still, you’d want to think hard.

This new fleet is supposed to cost something like 85 billion dollars. For that kind of money you could build the NBN and still have enough for high speed rail from Sydney to Melbourne: lasting infrastructure investments. You wouldn’t want to commit to buying a new batch of subs because you’re pretty sure you might need them one day.

There’s things that you don’t talk about at parties because deep down you want them on that wall, you need them on that wall.
They use terms like matelot, hello sailor and bilge pump, you use them as a punch line.

they should just buy some yank subs with tomahawk cruise missiles

wookiemeister said:

they should just buy some yank subs with tomahawk cruise missiles

…just eh? So simple in wookie world.

wookiemeister said:

they should just buy some yank subs with tomahawk cruise missiles

The yanks don’t have any diesel subs, they’re all nuclear-powered. Might be a bit of a hurdle.

AwesomeO said:

wookiemeister said:

they should just buy some yank subs with tomahawk cruise missiles

…just eh? So simple in wookie world.

The yanks have touble sharing even with their bff friends.

jjjust moi said:

AwesomeO said:

wookiemeister said:

they should just buy some yank subs with tomahawk cruise missiles

…just eh? So simple in wookie world.

The yanks have touble sharing even with their bff friends.

not Israel , they get discounts on fighter jets, we just get stuff that doesn’t work

best friends can also cart off secrets out of your intelligence agencies

I wouldn’t worry about it, whatever decision they make will be stupid

and what’s the point anyway after they’ve flooded the country with a fifth column hell bent on your destruction ?

for what it’s worth it’s not worth buying anything more except a few rifles and anti tank missiles

maybe they’d be better off making a few thousand war bots – armed robots that charge using a small reactors and can sit there for years until springing into action talking down tanks, APCs, helicopters, aircraft, infantry etc.

a general warbot uses its ammunition sparingly , it will wound infantry rather than kill as it is there to maximise casualties and effort to take them off the battlefield.

beware, the warbot can disable helicopters with well aimed 50 cal shots carrying thousands if rounds even one in the field is formidable , it can hide, crawl and bring to a halt any advance by most modern armies, covering large distances quickly at a charge and shooting whilst running it can lay down its own covering fire and smoke.

warbots are most likely to be used en masse for battlefield effectiveness

maybe they’d be better off making a few thousand war bots – armed robots that charge using a small reactors and can sit there for years until springing into action talking down tanks, APCs, helicopters, aircraft, infantry etc.

a general warbot uses its ammunition sparingly , it will wound infantry rather than kill as it is there to maximise casualties and effort to take them off the battlefield.

beware, the warbot can disable helicopters with well aimed 50 cal shots carrying thousands if rounds even one in the field is formidable , it can hide, crawl and bring to a halt any advance by most modern armies, covering large distances quickly at a charge and shooting whilst running it can lay down its own covering fire and smoke.

warbots are most likely to be used en masse for battlefield effectiveness

wookiemeister said:

maybe they’d be better off making a few thousand war bots – armed robots that charge using a small reactors and can sit there for years until springing into action talking down tanks, APCs, helicopters, aircraft, infantry etc.

a general warbot uses its ammunition sparingly , it will wound infantry rather than kill as it is there to maximise casualties and effort to take them off the battlefield.

beware, the warbot can disable helicopters with well aimed 50 cal shots carrying thousands if rounds even one in the field is formidable , it can hide, crawl and bring to a halt any advance by most modern armies, covering large distances quickly at a charge and shooting whilst running it can lay down its own covering fire and smoke.

warbots are most likely to be used en masse for battlefield effectiveness

I think you are wandering into the realms of fantasy Jones.

oh dear – warbots – cue foaming at the mouth and double-posting

I suppose it is easy to sit back and think that Australia has no enemies likely yo invade but on the scale of many decades, shit happens. I dare say that twenty years ago, no one predicted this wave of Russian revanchism yet here we are.

Call be Atomic Arthur but if ever there was an application for nuclear power, it’s running submarines.

anything that needs lots if power in a small spaces

nuclear power can never be viable or safe in the hands of private enterprise trying to make money from it, tepco had consistently been negligent for years – eventually it blew up in their faces without any consequences apart from a “my- bad” .

up late or up early, wookie?

party_pants said:

oh dear – warbots – cue foaming at the mouth and double-posting

Maybe, maybe not.

Drone submarines that don’t need crew, therefore no life support so can be much simpler and cheaper and still do the intelligence work.

Communications would have to be good though.

Communications would have to be good though.

which is hard when underwater. ELF has a very low bitrate.

And just to give an indication of what i mean

ChrispenEvan said:

And just to give an indication of what i mean

Yep, saw that on Wiki too.

Of course, subs could surface to upload/download data via normal communications, and then go about their business autonomously.

Or perhaps send up a communications module to the surface on a wire for continual comms if needed.

you don’t want your subs surfacing, that is the whole point in having subs in the first place. you want to keep them underwater and hard to locate.

Morning Pilgrims, today I’ll make the inevitable and un-necessary changes to an intricate coal transfer chute system that I just sent the boss and go to Bunnings to buy the fittings and pipe to fix the tank overflow.

ChrispenEvan said:

you don’t want your subs surfacing, that is the whole point in having subs in the first place. you want to keep them underwater and hard to locate.

If we get diesel subs they’ll have to surface sometime anyway.

Unless we go nuclear, which I don’t think is something our government wants to do.

lobs a depth charge on PWM as he surfaces to communicate with the world.

Peak Warming Man said:

Morning Pilgrims, today I’ll make the inevitable and un-necessary changes to an intricate coal transfer chute system that I just sent the boss and go to Bunnings to buy the fittings and pipe to fix the tank overflow.

Are you designing our new subs then ?

Damn, and only yesterday I was paying out on Bubblecar for the same thing.

that is true of diesels. the thing with having a human on board is that the mission parameters can be changed in real time. that can’t be done with autonomous vehicles. so if the situation changes and your autonomous sub can’t get new orders, because you don’t want it to surface, then the mission fails.

Peak Warming Man said:

Damn, and only yesterday I was paying out on Bubblecar for the same thing.

Karma

The other major benefit conferred by diesel subs relates to their operational capabilities. While early diesel technologies greatly impinged on the length of time a submarine could remain submerged and deployed, new technologies have improved this time. Through the Second World War, submarines needed to either surface or use snorkels in order to obtain the oxygen needed to recharge their batteries and continue operating. This both left them vulnerable to attack and reduced their range, since they could only be submerged for several days at a time. Modern diesel submarines utilizing air-independent propulsion can remain submerged for about a month. Moreover, as Schmitt points out, unlike a nuclear-powered sub, a diesel sub can turn off its engine and sit on the ocean floor “deadly silent, while monitoring whatever passes over and around it.” (Although it should be noted that a nuclear sub could also switch off its propellers and also remain extremely quiet)

http://csis.org/blog/nuclear-vs-diesel-submarines

ChrispenEvan said:

The other major benefit conferred by diesel subs relates to their operational capabilities. While early diesel technologies greatly impinged on the length of time a submarine could remain submerged and deployed, new technologies have improved this time. Through the Second World War, submarines needed to either surface or use snorkels in order to obtain the oxygen needed to recharge their batteries and continue operating. This both left them vulnerable to attack and reduced their range, since they could only be submerged for several days at a time. Modern diesel submarines utilizing air-independent propulsion can remain submerged for about a month. Moreover, as Schmitt points out, unlike a nuclear-powered sub, a diesel sub can turn off its engine and sit on the ocean floor “deadly silent, while monitoring whatever passes over and around it.” (Although it should be noted that a nuclear sub could also switch off its propellers and also remain extremely quiet)

http://csis.org/blog/nuclear-vs-diesel-submarines

“ An alternative to the diesel option (mentioned, but not favored by Schmitt) might be unmanned underwater vehicles (UUVs). These would be cheaper than building more nuclear subs, and would be able to fulfill “’dull and dangerous’ missions” that are currently done by some attack submarines. Although the effectiveness of UUVs have yet to be fully realized, investment in this area may make more sense than building a new fleet of diesel submarines. A realistic and balanced assessment of the capabilities of various alternatives vis a vis nuclear subs should yield a better sense of which benefits can be achieved by their adoption. “

“dull and dangerous” would include sitting on the bottom, silent, and when the order came to launch. or sitting there listening.

Drone submarines would make a lot of sense, no need for life support system and you could build a dozen for the cost of one human crewed one. Suicide drone submarines as well, serves no purpose except to destroy another submarine or naval vessel.

they do have drone suicide submarines, they call them torpedoes.

ChrispenEvan said:

they do have drone suicide submarines, they call them torpedoes.

Smarter ones though that act like submarines, in ability to move for example

there are ones that sit on the bottom and wait until a target appears in range then launch automatically.

Cymek said:

ChrispenEvan said:

they do have drone suicide submarines, they call them torpedoes.

Smarter ones though that act like submarines, in ability to move for example

I’m pretty sure that torpedoes move. They’d be fairly useless if they didn’t.

ChrispenEvan said:

there are ones that sit on the bottom and wait until a target appears in range then launch automatically.

Was not aware of that

sibeen said:

Cymek said:

ChrispenEvan said:

they do have drone suicide submarines, they call them torpedoes.

Smarter ones though that act like submarines, in ability to move for example

I’m pretty sure that torpedoes move. They’d be fairly useless if they didn’t.

Yes, can they move up and down, stop wait, etc as a countermeasure to defensive methods to stop them

sibeen said:

Cymek said:

ChrispenEvan said:

they do have drone suicide submarines, they call them torpedoes.

Smarter ones though that act like submarines, in ability to move for example

I’m pretty sure that torpedoes move. They’d be fairly useless if they didn’t.

Torpedos that don’t move are called mines.

Just had proof that god isn’t a Jehovah.
They came to visit just now & one of them was stung by a wasp.

Tamb said:

Just had proof that god isn’t a Jehovah.
They came to visit just now & one of them was stung by a wasp.

Oops, sorry. Wrong fred.

Cymek said:

ChrispenEvan said:

they do have drone suicide submarines, they call them torpedoes.

Smarter ones though that act like submarines, in ability to move for example

Japan used suicide or kamikaze submarines during the war.

sibeen said:

Cymek said:

ChrispenEvan said:

they do have drone suicide submarines, they call them torpedoes.

Smarter ones though that act like submarines, in ability to move for example

I’m pretty sure that torpedoes move. They’d be fairly useless if they didn’t.

magnetic mines. Some torpedoes were magnetic as well.

The new breed of torpedoes am very cool, they have a swim function where they can leave the sub stealthily swim out to a point away from the sub so the attack is launched from a new direction, this defeats the bore shot countermeasure where you launch toward the incoming torpedo and the seeker heads homes in automatically on the enemy sub. And that’s just the stuff that is well known, they would have other tricks that are still super classified.

wow, crazy really blew a fuse in this thread.

Was he ever in the navy?

The_observer said:

wow, crazy really blew a fuse in this thread.

Was he ever in the navy?

I’m sorry, that allowed of stupid irony is not allowed in this forum.. some of us have delicately calibrated irony detectors…

CrazyNeutrino said:

How about I piss off from the forum altogether

seems to have worked so far

Dropbear said:

The_observer said:

wow, crazy really blew a fuse in this thread.

Was he ever in the navy?

I’m sorry, that allowed of stupid irony is not allowed in this forum.. some of us have delicately calibrated irony detectors…

I was just thinking that irony detection is a unnamed human sense, its undeveloped in most.

Dropbear said:

The_observer said:

wow, crazy really blew a fuse in this thread.

Was he ever in the navy?

I’m sorry, that allowed of stupid irony is not allowed in this forum.. some of us have delicately calibrated irony detectors…

I might start a charity into research for those suffering from an irony blind spot

CrazyNeutrino said:

havent you read the papers

the military suffers from sexual harassment

people males and females in the armed forces operate these defensive systems

eliminate sexual haresmant in the armed forces and you have a stronger armed force

if no one can see that

STICK YOU HEAD IN THE SAND

PEOPLE OPERATE DEFENSIVE SYSTEMS

ARGH,

wow, blown fuse dude

T_o, your “stop being an arse” button is malfunctioning.

Cymek said:

Dropbear said:

The_observer said:

wow, crazy really blew a fuse in this thread.

Was he ever in the navy?

I’m sorry, that allowed of stupid irony is not allowed in this forum.. some of us have delicately calibrated irony detectors…

I might start a charity into research for those suffering from an irony blind spot

nah, start a charity for people who have been sexually abused…while in the armed forces

those PEOPLE OPERATE DEFENSIVE SYSTEMS

didn’t ya know?

Bubblecar said:

T_o, your “stop being an arse” button is malfunctioning.

now, I was just wondering why crazy got his knickers in such a knot?

about sexual harassment in the armed forces

I know they operate defensive systems and all,,, but

bubblecar, he got slammed in the climate thread so now he is just proving how good he is by picking on CN. best to ignore the bully.

ChrispenEvan said:

bubblecar, he got slammed in the climate thread so now he is just proving how good he is by picking on CN. best to ignore the bully.

got slammed

ha ha

yep, DV summed you up nicely.

ChrispenEvan said:

bubblecar, he got slammed in the climate thread so now he is just proving how good he is by picking on CN. best to ignore the bully.

apparently there’s quite a few bullies around here boris

that must be why pf’s fucked off as well.

ChrispenEvan said:

yep, DV summed you up nicely.

no, dv made a claim he couldn’t back up.

and the title of his thread was bs, as I showed.

tick

The_observer said:

Cymek said:

Dropbear said:

I’m sorry, that allowed of stupid irony is not allowed in this forum.. some of us have delicately calibrated irony detectors…

I might start a charity into research for those suffering from an irony blind spot

nah, start a charity for people who have been sexually abused…while in the armed forces

those PEOPLE OPERATE DEFENSIVE SYSTEMS

didn’t ya know?

Yeah I’ve read the news stories and its poor form to allow it happen and ignore it, but doesn’t every insititute sweep such behaviour under the carpet and only does something when the wider public becomes aware of it, they don’t actually care it’s more damage control

nah, you only copy and paste. you can’t form an argument out of your own brain.

Cymek said:

The_observer said:

Cymek said:

I might start a charity into research for those suffering from an irony blind spot

nah, start a charity for people who have been sexually abused…while in the armed forces

those PEOPLE OPERATE DEFENSIVE SYSTEMS

didn’t ya know?

Yeah I’ve read the news stories and its poor form to allow it happen and ignore it, but doesn’t every insititute sweep such behaviour under the carpet and only does something when the wider public becomes aware of it, they don’t actually care it’s more damage control

Yes, it’s not just the armed forces where this happens.

But I think they are trying to improve things, aren’t they? the armed forces

ChrispenEvan said:

nah, you only copy and paste. you can’t form an argument out of your own brain.

exactly what opinions do you espouse here that you are the originator of?

I won’t hold my breath

The_observer said:

Cymek said:

The_observer said:

nah, start a charity for people who have been sexually abused…while in the armed forces

those PEOPLE OPERATE DEFENSIVE SYSTEMS

didn’t ya know?

Yeah I’ve read the news stories and its poor form to allow it happen and ignore it, but doesn’t every insititute sweep such behaviour under the carpet and only does something when the wider public becomes aware of it, they don’t actually care it’s more damage control

Yes, it’s not just the armed forces where this happens.

But I think they are trying to improve things, aren’t they? the armed forces

You’d hope so

I see the standard of debate on this thread has deteriorated somewhat.

Pity, it was quite interesting for a while.

I suppose it the worse comes to worst, submarines are you last line of “defense” if all your other armed forces have been destroyed.

The half life of a thread on here is measured in the tens of posts until Wookie or CN or one of the cu..grubs comes in to trash it with their nonsense

What is up with CN? He seems to be getting odder.

dv said:

What is up with CN? He seems to be getting odder.

He’s OK, just overdoes things now & then.

Bubblecar said:

dv said:

What is up with CN? He seems to be getting odder.

He’s OK, just overdoes things now & then.

Probably experiencing a period of alienated/isolated emotional fragility.

Dropbear said:

The half life of a thread on here is measured in the tens of posts until Wookie or CN or one of the cu..grubs comes in to trash it with their nonsense

it must be hideous for you

wookiemeister said:

Dropbear said:

The half life of a thread on here is measured in the tens of posts until Wookie or CN or one of the cu..grubs comes in to trash it with their nonsense

it must be hideous for you

No it’s just sad seeing interesting conversations being shat on, for trolls amusement

For information even back in 2004 on just about every wall you can think of there would be a poster about sexual harassment and a Canberra number, every unit has a designated contact, you can also at all times go up through the chain of command to the CO just by saying it is private I want to speak to the CO, in every first RO of the year where appointments and standing orders are listed (and which it is every members responsibility to read, ignorance is no excuse) are the orders listed and contact numbers and on top of that, every member has to do an induction and every year is a unit induction where names are marked off the rolls where sexual harassment, security, drug, theft and OHS policies are detailed in a half day instruction.

I would suggest they are doing far more than most organisations.

I haven’t viewed all of this thread but for sometime the suggestion was evident the expansion of a naval capacity makes sense for an island nation such as ours.

the navy has to assist our coast guard and work in conjunction because our coastline is so vast. Makes sense to buy more vessels and stealth capacities such as what submarines will offer.

Dropbear said:

wookiemeister said:

Dropbear said:

The half life of a thread on here is measured in the tens of posts until Wookie or CN or one of the cu..grubs comes in to trash it with their nonsense

it must be hideous for you

No it’s just sad seeing interesting conversations being shat on, for trolls amusement

it’s a minor Internet forum droppy and of course – you don’t need to read any of my posts, that’s what others do

wookiemeister said:

Dropbear said:

wookiemeister said:

it must be hideous for you

No it’s just sad seeing interesting conversations being shat on, for trolls amusement

it’s a minor Internet forum droppy and of course – you don’t need to read any of my posts, that’s what others do

in his defense this is one of the final remnants of what sssf was …a place to discuss science and banter…the banter in the chat space and science in the named threads…

ratty one said:

wookiemeister said:

Dropbear said:

No it’s just sad seeing interesting conversations being shat on, for trolls amusement

it’s a minor Internet forum droppy and of course – you don’t need to read any of my posts, that’s what others do

in his defense this is one of the final remnants of what sssf was …a place to discuss science and banter…the banter in the chat space and science in the named threads…

I like to play it easy breezey here

You like to shit all over proper threads.. If you way to talk your conspiracy bullshit then do it in the chat thread

Dropbear said:

You like to shit all over proper threads.. If you way to talk your conspiracy bullshit then do it in the chat thread

not conspiracy a natural progression of thoughts that sprouts from military threads, why are we fighting, is the threat credible, if not then why are we spending this money. are there more effective ways to do the same thing – if you are spending 80- 90 billion you could think of different ways to do the same thing – I don’t see a skerrick of imagination or innovation from you , loosen up and you might start thinking for yourself

China’s supersonic submarine, which could go from Shanghai to San Francisco in 100 minutes, creeps ever closer to reality

so, how about developing a torpedo that does the same thing?

a supersonic torpedo

and of course develop satellite tech that can see a supersonic sub moving at that speed and that can steer the supersonic torpedo towards the supersonic submarine

seems a bit 007 Bond stuff

Arts said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

Arts said:

this thread is about submarines and defence options. Start a new thread if you seriously want to discuss sexual harassment in the armed forces. It’s a worthy topic.

havent you read the papers

the military suffers from sexual harassment

people males and females in the armed forces operate these defensive systems

eliminate sexual haresmant in the armed forces and you have a stronger armed force

if no one can see that

STICK YOU HEAD IN THE SAND

PEOPLE OPERATE DEFENSIVE SYSTEMS

ARGH,

so, your strategic argument for building submarines as opposed to other defence systems is to take sexual harassment out of the military?

You don’t get it do you

civilians build submarines

military personal operate them

military personal ie males and females that operate defensive systems are prone to weaknesses

ie SEX

train them properly using discipline, to know when they are being sexually harassed or to avoid sexually harassing others

means you have a stronger military force, because they are focused on their duty

people operate defensive systems, ok so if military personal are operating defensive systems are free of sexual harassment then their minds are fully focused on their duty, yes?

and if military personal operating defensive systems are free from causing sexual harassment then their minds are fully focused on their duty, yes?

people operate defensive systems

improve the people machine interface and you have an advantage

now lets get back to strategic argument

if I was an admiral and knew of hundreds of cases of sexual harassment I would be really pissed off

why?

because those military personnel the perpetrators and the victims are not focused on their duty, they are distracted by sex

that’s across the whole military, hundreds of people

means a strategic weakness, and if I was a general I would be really angry

remove sexual harassment from the military and you have a strategic advantage over the enemy because you have taken out sexual distraction and the military personnel are fully focused on their duty

Do you get it now?

?

Don’t be a cunt, CN

CrazyNeutrino said:

Arts said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

havent you read the papers

the military suffers from sexual harassment

people males and females in the armed forces operate these defensive systems

eliminate sexual haresmant in the armed forces and you have a stronger armed force

if no one can see that

STICK YOU HEAD IN THE SAND

PEOPLE OPERATE DEFENSIVE SYSTEMS

ARGH,

so, your strategic argument for building submarines as opposed to other defence systems is to take sexual harassment out of the military?

You don’t get it do you

civilians build submarines

military personal operate them

military personal ie males and females that operate defensive systems are prone to weaknesses

ie SEX

train them properly using discipline, to know when they are being sexually harassed or to avoid sexually harassing others

means you have a stronger military force, because they are focused on their duty

people operate defensive systems, ok so if military personal are operating defensive systems are free of sexual harassment then their minds are fully focused on their duty, yes?

and if military personal operating defensive systems are free from causing sexual harassment then their minds are fully focused on their duty, yes?

people operate defensive systems

improve the people machine interface and you have an advantage

now lets get back to strategic argument

if I was an admiral and knew of hundreds of cases of sexual harassment I would be really pissed off

why?

because those military personnel the perpetrators and the victims are not focused on their duty, they are distracted by sex

that’s across the whole military, hundreds of people

means a strategic weakness, and if I was a general I would be really angry

remove sexual harassment from the military and you have a strategic advantage over the enemy because you have taken out sexual distraction and the military personnel are fully focused on their duty

Do you get it now?

?

tl;dr

Dropbear said:

Don’t be a cunt, CN

FUCK OFF DropBEAR

diddly-squat said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

Arts said:

so, your strategic argument for building submarines as opposed to other defence systems is to take sexual harassment out of the military?

You don’t get it do you

civilians build submarines

military personal operate them

military personal ie males and females that operate defensive systems are prone to weaknesses

ie SEX

train them properly using discipline, to know when they are being sexually harassed or to avoid sexually harassing others

means you have a stronger military force, because they are focused on their duty

people operate defensive systems, ok so if military personal are operating defensive systems are free of sexual harassment then their minds are fully focused on their duty, yes?

and if military personal operating defensive systems are free from causing sexual harassment then their minds are fully focused on their duty, yes?

people operate defensive systems

improve the people machine interface and you have an advantage

now lets get back to strategic argument

if I was an admiral and knew of hundreds of cases of sexual harassment I would be really pissed off

why?

because those military personnel the perpetrators and the victims are not focused on their duty, they are distracted by sex

that’s across the whole military, hundreds of people

means a strategic weakness, and if I was a general I would be really angry

remove sexual harassment from the military and you have a strategic advantage over the enemy because you have taken out sexual distraction and the military personnel are fully focused on their duty

Do you get it now?

?

tl;dr

YOU CAN FUCK OFF TOO

CrazyNeutrino said:

Dropbear said:

Don’t be a cunt, CN

FUCK OFF DropBEAR

CrazyNeutrino said:

Dropbear said:

Don’t be a cunt, CN

FUCK OFF DropBEAR

No. You only say that when a non-aussie cricketer is dismissed.

CrazyNeutrino said:

!http://31.media.tumblr.com/31f297e59f6f3e2b090eed0bd7a958b0/tumblr_mslrq6eMs51rj4ls1o1_500.gif

Hahahahahahaha!

Tamb said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

Dropbear said:

Don’t be a cunt, CN

FUCK OFF DropBEAR

No. You only say that when a non-aussie cricketer is dismissed.

of sorry

dont like censorship

dont like sexist pigs

dont like dumb people

Michael V said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

!http://31.media.tumblr.com/31f297e59f6f3e2b090eed0bd7a958b0/tumblr_mslrq6eMs51rj4ls1o1_500.gif

Hahahahahahaha!

happy someone got it

CrazyNeutrino said:

diddly-squat said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

You don’t get it do you

civilians build submarines

military personal operate them

military personal ie males and females that operate defensive systems are prone to weaknesses

ie SEX

train them properly using discipline, to know when they are being sexually harassed or to avoid sexually harassing others

means you have a stronger military force, because they are focused on their duty

people operate defensive systems, ok so if military personal are operating defensive systems are free of sexual harassment then their minds are fully focused on their duty, yes?

and if military personal operating defensive systems are free from causing sexual harassment then their minds are fully focused on their duty, yes?

people operate defensive systems

improve the people machine interface and you have an advantage

now lets get back to strategic argument

if I was an admiral and knew of hundreds of cases of sexual harassment I would be really pissed off

why?

because those military personnel the perpetrators and the victims are not focused on their duty, they are distracted by sex

that’s across the whole military, hundreds of people

means a strategic weakness, and if I was a general I would be really angry

remove sexual harassment from the military and you have a strategic advantage over the enemy because you have taken out sexual distraction and the military personnel are fully focused on their duty

Do you get it now?

?

tl;dr

YOU CAN FUCK OFF TOO

but there is nothing

more annoying than a string of broken

text separated by carriage returns and no grammar because it is hard

to read

and as a result often means that it’s much harder for the writer to convey

context

and

purpose

and means the reader often misses the point

diddly-squat said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

diddly-squat said:

tl;dr

YOU CAN FUCK OFF TOO

but there is nothing

more annoying than a string of broken

text separated by carriage returns and no grammar because it is hard

to read

and as a result often means that it’s much harder for the writer to convey

context

and

purpose

and means the reader often misses the point

Then

read

it

slowly

CN,, you were asked nicely to take your off topic BS out of the thread.. shrug.. you reap what you sew..

throwing your drug-fked tanties doesn’t help a lot.

CrazyNeutrino said:

Do you get it now?

?

Nup.

CrazyNeutrino said:

China’s supersonic submarine, which could go from Shanghai to San Francisco in 100 minutes, creeps ever closer to reality

so, how about developing a torpedo that does the same thing?

a supersonic torpedo

and of course develop satellite tech that can see a supersonic sub moving at that speed and that can steer the supersonic torpedo towards the supersonic submarine

seems a bit 007 Bond stuff

you’d end up ramming shipping containers and anything else floating around , the sub would be full of dents and be causing lots of wake because of it

then you’ve got the damage caused by something being sucked into the screw at the back

I thought all the oxygen had been sucked out of this thread

Dropbear said:

CN,, you were asked nicely to take your off topic BS out of the thread.. shrug.. you reap what you sew..

throwing your drug-fked tanties doesn’t help a lot.

not understanding the damage of sexual harassment doesn’t not help either

party_pants said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

Do you get it now?

?

Dumb?

Nup.

sexual harassment in the military is a distraction

is a distraction to their duty

wookiemeister said:

I thought all the oxygen had been sucked out of this thread

Wrong

it will continue until everyone understands

CrazyNeutrino said:

No, I’m the most intelligent person on this forum.

(Apart from Mollwolfumble and DV)

um, and Michael V, and Diddly and Dropbear and Sibeen and Boris and Divine Angel… and Arts and Carmen Sandiago and Buffy…

CrazyNeutrino said:

party_pants said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

Do you get it now?

I thought that was the trouble. Some people were getting it when they shouldn’t.

CrazyNeutrino said:

China’s supersonic submarine, which could go from Shanghai to San Francisco in 100 minutes, creeps ever closer to reality

so, how about developing a torpedo that does the same thing?

a supersonic torpedo

and of course develop satellite tech that can see a supersonic sub moving at that speed and that can steer the supersonic torpedo towards the supersonic submarine

seems a bit 007 Bond stuff

underwater supersonic torpedoes

and some people need one up their arse

party_pants said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

No, I’m the most intelligent person on this forum.

(Apart from Mollwolfumble and DV)

um, and Michael V, and Diddly and Dropbear and Sibeen and Boris and Divine Angel… and Arts and Carmen Sandiago and Buffy…

Awwww! I’m still here too.

Tamb said:

party_pants said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

No, I’m the most intelligent person on this forum.

(Apart from Mollwolfumble and DV)

um, and Michael V, and Diddly and Dropbear and Sibeen and Boris and Divine Angel… and Arts and Carmen Sandiago and Buffy…

Awwww! I’m still here too.

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex in the military is a distraction

ChrispenEvan said:

“dull and dangerous” would include sitting on the bottom, silent, and when the order came to launch. or sitting there listening.

the order would require antenna to to reeled out as it moved along or to come up to periscope depth

it might receive blue green laser light from a satellite but it still needs to come to near the surface

my guesses are that the British have already worked out a way to communicate using quantum entanglement and have their own real time tx/rx with their bases , no long antennas .

CrazyNeutrino said:

Tamb said:

party_pants said:

No, I’m the most intelligent person on this forum.

(Apart from Mollwolfumble and DV)

um, and Michael V, and Diddly and Dropbear and Sibeen and Boris and Divine Angel… and Arts and Carmen Sandiago and Buffy…

Awwww! I’m still here too.

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex is a normal part of the human condition. Look at the trouble the catholic church is in without it.

CrazyNeutrino said:

and some people need one up their arse

I hear there is a lot of this sort of hazing in the navy, ‘up the arse’ etc. Sounds as though it would contravene the sexual harassment guidelines.

CrazyNeutrino said:

wookiemeister said:

I thought all the oxygen had been sucked out of this thread

Wrong

it will continue until everyone understands

I will stand alongside you in my underpants waving the flag valiantly , unrepentant , unyielding until everyone understands too

so, are we going build any supersonic submarines

or supersonic torpedoes

or nuclear powered submarines

or train military personnel “properly”

wookiemeister said:

ChrispenEvan said:

“dull and dangerous” would include sitting on the bottom, silent, and when the order came to launch. or sitting there listening.

the order would require antenna to to reeled out as it moved along or to come up to periscope depth

it might receive blue green laser light from a satellite but it still needs to come to near the surface

my guesses are that the British have already worked out a way to communicate using quantum entanglement and have their own real time tx/rx with their bases , no long antennas .

The Brits & no doubt others used/use VLF radio to communicate with submerged subs. From memory about 12 hz.

the hazing thing would only work on a younger person

an older person over say thirty would tell them to and get fucked and that it would extremely unwise to persue the matter

Tamb said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

Tamb said:

Awwww! I’m still here too.

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex is a normal part of the human condition. Look at the trouble the catholic church is in without it.

yeah, but the catholic church is not the military is it

the church do not operate defensive systems do they

and if you operate defensive systems you would want all your military personnel to be focused on their duty, yes?

take sexual harassment out of the military

strategic advantage

CrazyNeutrino said:

so, are we going build any supersonic submarines

or supersonic torpedoes

or nuclear powered submarines

or train military personnel “properly”

no

no money

intelligent people run wars not squaddies

Alan Turing won the second world war for the British

Crazy tried once before to throw a stake into them heart of an interesting subject and has returned to deliver a coup de grace.

Witty Rejoinder said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

and some people need one up their arse

I hear there is a lot of this sort of hazing in the navy, ‘up the arse’ etc. Sounds as though it would contravene the sexual harassment guidelines.

exactly

take sexual harassment out of the military

strategic advantage

from what I’ve seen the military here used to be populated by alcoholics with a vindictive edge.

nowadays it’s all about well meaning fools, lesbians and people sat around discussing / complaining about their wages.

Crazy, since everyone here agrees with you that sexual harassment is a bad thing, what’s your problem?

Bubblecar said:

Crazy, since everyone here agrees with you that sexual harassment is a bad thing, what’s your problem?

well some dont

wookiemeister said:

from what I’ve seen the military here used to be populated by alcoholics with a vindictive edge.

nowadays it’s all about well meaning fools, lesbians and people sat around discussing / complaining about their wages.

What was your experience with the military again?

CrazyNeutrino said:

Bubblecar said:

Crazy, since everyone here agrees with you that sexual harassment is a bad thing, what’s your problem?

well some dont

No, they all do. They’re just wanting you to take that topic to its own thread so they can talk about submarines in this one.

CrazyNeutrino said:

Tamb said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

Sex in the military is a distraction

Sex is a normal part of the human condition. Look at the trouble the catholic church is in without it.

yeah, but the catholic church is not the military is it

the church do not operate defensive systems do they

and if you operate defensive systems you would want all your military personnel to be focused on their duty, yes?

take sexual harassment out of the military

strategic advantage

Sadly, young, fir men are either doing it or thinking about doing it.
I agree. Take sexual harassment out of the military but replace it with opportunities for normal human sexual activities.

Bubblecar said:

Crazy, since everyone here agrees with you that sexual harassment is a bad thing, what’s your problem?

and if everyone realizes that sexual harassment in the military is a distraction

I will go back to astronomy

wookiemeister said:

the hazing thing would only work on a younger person

an older person over say thirty would tell them to and get fucked and that it would extremely unwise to persue the matter

I’m not sure you really understand what ‘chain of command’ actually means

wookiemeister said:

nowadays it’s all about well meaning fools, lesbians and people sat around discussing / complaining about their wages.

Jacqui Lambie?

Bubblecar said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

Bubblecar said:

Crazy, since everyone here agrees with you that sexual harassment is a bad thing, what’s your problem?

well some dont

No, they all do. They’re just wanting you to take that topic to its own thread so they can talk about submarines in this one.

ok

China’s supersonic submarine, which could go from Shanghai to San Francisco in 100 minutes, creeps ever closer to reality

China’s supersonic submarine, which could go from Shanghai to San Francisco in 100 minutes, creeps ever closer to reality

Researchers in China are reporting that they’ve taken a big step towards creating a supersonic submarine. This technology, which could just as easily be applied to weaponized torpedoes as military or civilian submarines, could theoretically get from Shanghai to San Francisco — about 6,000 miles — in just 100 minutes. If all this doesn’t sound crazy enough, get this: This new advance by the Chinese is based on supercavitation, which was originally developed by the Soviets in the ’60s, during the Cold War.

As you may already know, it’s a lot harder for an object to move quickly through water than air. This is mostly due to increased drag. Without getting into the complexities of fluid dynamics, water is simply much thicker and more viscous than air — and as a result it requires a lot more energy for an object to push through it. You can experience the increased drag of water yourself next time you’re in a swimming pool: Raise your hand above your head, and then let it fall towards the water. (Or alternatively, if there are people sunbathing nearby, do a belly flop.)

more….

===

money for developing a supersonic torpedo?

AwesomeO said:

wookiemeister said:

from what I’ve seen the military here used to be populated by alcoholics with a vindictive edge.

nowadays it’s all about well meaning fools, lesbians and people sat around discussing / complaining about their wages.

What was your experience with the military again?

31st foot and mouth regiment

Witty Rejoinder said:

wookiemeister said:

nowadays it’s all about well meaning fools, lesbians and people sat around discussing / complaining about their wages.

Jacqui Lambie?

She is still a lamb

I think the puppet united party fiasco was a fluke

wookiemeister said:

AwesomeO said:

wookiemeister said:

from what I’ve seen the military here used to be populated by alcoholics with a vindictive edge.

nowadays it’s all about well meaning fools, lesbians and people sat around discussing / complaining about their wages.

What was your experience with the military again?

31st foot and mouth regiment

Foot in mouth? I think it fair to ask as you preface a lot of your silly stuff with “in my experience”.

AwesomeO said:

wookiemeister said:

AwesomeO said:

What was your experience with the military again?

31st foot and mouth regiment

Foot in mouth? I think it fair to ask as you preface a lot of your silly stuff with “in my experience”.

I say many things

I jazz things up a little

Crazy I have thought long and hard and decided the admonishment to stop being a cunt was a step too far.

In the spirit of glasnost and to set achieveable goals i therefore modify the request to “try and be less of a cunt”

wookiemeister said:

AwesomeO said:

wookiemeister said:

31st foot and mouth regiment

Foot in mouth? I think it fair to ask as you preface a lot of your silly stuff with “in my experience”.

I say many things

I jazz things up a little

So not ex military then?

AwesomeO said:

wookiemeister said:

AwesomeO said:

Foot in mouth? I think it fair to ask as you preface a lot of your silly stuff with “in my experience”.

I say many things

I jazz things up a little

So not ex military then?

my ex was in the military

wookiemeister said:

AwesomeO said:

wookiemeister said:

I say many things

I jazz things up a little

So not ex military then?

my ex was in the military

lulz, much experience, so wow.

Dropbear said:

Crazy I have thought long and hard and decided the admonishment to stop being a cunt was a step too far.

In the spirit of glasnost and to set achieveable goals i therefore modify the request to “try and be less of a cunt”

yeah, ok

but I dont have a pussy

if I did, it would be a distraction

I would need to discipline myself

:)

>I would need to discipline myself :)”

keeping with submarines, do you think they are a phallic symbol…

transition said:

>I would need to discipline myself :)”

keeping with submarines, do you think they are a phallic symbol…

maybe name the submarine “Hermaphrodite”

phallic object in a moist environment

CrazyNeutrino said:

transition said:

>I would need to discipline myself :)”

keeping with submarines, do you think they are a phallic symbol…

maybe name the submarine “Hermaphrodite”

phallic object in a moist environment

the Latin vagina translates as ‘sword holder’. Go for latin, not academic……..

Postpocelipse said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

transition said:

>I would need to discipline myself :)”

keeping with submarines, do you think they are a phallic symbol…

maybe name the submarine “Hermaphrodite”

phallic object in a moist environment

the Latin vagina translates as ‘sword holder’. Go for latin, not academic……..

LiquidusExturboAuriscalpeum