Not many threads talk of the New Class of US subs . I would love to get opinions on what you guys think of it and how it compares to seawolf , los angeles and Akula’s !!
http://www.military.com/soldiertech/0,14632,Soldiertech_Virginia,,00.html
By: joey - 25th October 2006 at 20:09
Beautiful Submarines.Indeed.a Master Sub shows the naval supremacy of US.
I wish we had em 🙁
By: sferrin - 25th October 2006 at 16:25
Its a Nice Sub , Perhaps not as silent as Sea Wolf are , But really built for Littoral & Special Force Operation.
But I would any day opt for an Akula -III over Virginia 😀
I’d be surprised if it wasn’t a little quieter than Seawolf since it’s newer.
By: Turbinia - 25th October 2006 at 16:21
I dunno, I can’t say a lot in public but I work in the nuclear decommissioning industry and I’ve seen some reports on the satus of a lot of old Russian boats that don’t make for good reading.
By: Neptune - 25th October 2006 at 16:15
Sorry T, Have to disagree with that… The world is shouting a bit too hard about it. It’s true that in the past they have had serious trouble with getting rid of the boats, but nowadays everything is going pretty rapidly with Norwegian, Japanese, US and other’s help. All in all their facilities could even be used to scrap the other nation’s nuclear subs. US also has over 20 old SSNs to get rid of.
As for Virginia, give me some! That’s a boat! I agree with Francois on that one, chose this over any Russian boat, be it akula I, II, III or XXXII!
By: Turbinia - 25th October 2006 at 15:41
There is an awful lot of info in the public domain on the dreadful safety record of the Soviet/Russian submarine service. Not just the serving boats, the way they dispose of their older boats is a scandal I think the world should be shouting about.
By: bring_it_on - 25th October 2006 at 15:34
I would not put one of my men in a russian sub.
I would not even check hand with a former sov sailor.
Cancer (asbestos) or cancer (gamma)?“Akula 3” doesn’t meaning anything.
Got any technical facts to back it up ? or just an opinion?
By: Francois5 - 25th October 2006 at 14:15
I would not put one of my men in a russian sub.
I would not even check hand with a former sov sailor.
Cancer (asbestos) or cancer (gamma)?
“Akula 3” doesn’t meaning anything.
By: bring_it_on - 25th October 2006 at 13:32
Its a Nice Sub , Perhaps not as silent as Sea Wolf are
As silent according to Global security / FAS
SEAWOLF (SSN-21)-Class quieting has been incorporated in a smaller hull while military performance has been maintained or improved. Compared with the Seawolf, the NSSN is slower, carries fewer weapons, and is less capable in diving depth and arctic operations. On the other hand, the NSSN is expected to be as quiet as the Seawolf, will incorporate a vertical launch system and have improved surveillance as well as special operations characteristics to enhance littoral warfare capability.
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/nssn.htm
But I would any day opt for an Akula -III over Virginia
Got any technical reason or just a personal thing ?
By: Austin - 25th October 2006 at 11:54
Its a Nice Sub , Perhaps not as silent as Sea Wolf are , But really built for Littoral & Special Force Operation.
But I would any day opt for an Akula -III over Virginia 😀
By: Merlock - 25th October 2006 at 08:29
I want a dozen of them for the French Navy!
Now!
________
Bmw vii a 7.3 history
Sign In
October 25, 2006 at 8:27 am