Among other things, we need to read the old Soviet stuff on how they intended to avoid or mitigate our SOSUS lines and P-3s. The South China Sea is no longer our exclusive turf...
I still say SSNX will use Columbia's propulsion plant and be between 434 and 476 (476.8 actually) feet and between 14560 and 17345 metric tons submerged.
Now guessing we will see a front end that has at least 1 87" tube based on this discussion. Probably 8 26" tubes again like Seawolf. Time to grow. Build 2 a year once we are done with Columbia. 40 year service life and eventually the fleet will grow.
I am afraid our and everyone's surface ships are just targets in this age of Drones and Hypersonic missiles. I hope to be wrong. There will be a way found to negate the drone. But until then?
That means the most viable, Survivable, and deadly will be the submarine.
Among other things, we need to read the old Soviet stuff on how they intended to avoid or mitigate our SOSUS lines and P-3s. The South China Sea is no longer our exclusive turf...
- REACT
- ADAPT
- OVERCOME
How do we know we still have an undersea advantage? I fear the Navy exhausted Rickover's fumes long ago.
We need to play Moneyball and work what advantages we have to the utmost.
For Paul. Bryan Clark's Twitter page. https://twitter.com/clarkdefense
I still say SSNX will use Columbia's propulsion plant and be between 434 and 476 (476.8 actually) feet and between 14560 and 17345 metric tons submerged.
Now guessing we will see a front end that has at least 1 87" tube based on this discussion. Probably 8 26" tubes again like Seawolf. Time to grow. Build 2 a year once we are done with Columbia. 40 year service life and eventually the fleet will grow.
I am afraid our and everyone's surface ships are just targets in this age of Drones and Hypersonic missiles. I hope to be wrong. There will be a way found to negate the drone. But until then?
That means the most viable, Survivable, and deadly will be the submarine.
It seems we are in a new age of modern warfare.