LITERALLY CANT MAKE THIS SHIT UP
nationalinterest.org
>U.S spends billions of dollars to build an aircraft carrier
>gets torpedo'd by swedish stealth submarine
>sinks
When did you realise Sweden's navy outguns U.S? I can't wait to torpedo the shit out of USS Ronald Reagan. How will amerifags ever recover?
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com
youtube.com
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
defense-aerospace.com
military1.com
nyheteridag.se
nyheteridag.se
nyheteridag.se
twitter.com
>Implying that even matters when nobody can drive it because there's no men in Sweden
can... or did?
non-nuclear powers cannot engage in modern warfare
at the very least they need nuclear armed allies
sounds like some dumb simulation or wargame
*Raises hand*
But I am Finnish so I may not count
Have you not sold them for parts to buy more Muslims yet?
>submarine can do the job it is designed for
great, great news!
I hope you realize that you can generally punch a hole in the hull of a ship with a pistol. A ship isn't some huge impenetrable mass, it still has to float you jackass.
Sweden stronk. And pretty faggy.
youtube.com
Like you'll ever get the chance with Somali and Arab dick up your arses Sven. Sweden as the world knows it won't exist within 50 years.
Good, we need a reason to nuke Sweden.
>aircraft carriers aren't protected by destroyers
learn a little bit about modern navies before you shitpost about them. 0/10
>Sweden as the world knows it won't exist within 50 years.
I give it 30
Holy shit 30?
I give it 5
>be Amerifat in military
>try to invade Caliphate of Sweden
>ship get sunk
>can't swim because black
>drowns
dude why cant we all just get along?
>Says the dude with a muslim mayor
Not too concerned.
We do war games to patch up these holes in our defenses.
That vulnerability will be gone soon.
top kek. What other things can you think of that will literally never happen?
>Fortunately, this did not occur in actual combat, but was simulated as part of a war game
This simulation inaccurately predicts Swedes wouldn't surrender at the slightest sign of conflict
>Swedish submarines driven by migrants
>crash into undersea rocks
>submarine floods everyone died
Sweden invented a kitchen knife that can literally stab a general do death. How you get to this general is irrelevant. Since generals are not defended at all.
Kys
>Be German vist Sweden for Fiki Fiki
>Vist club 10 Arabs approch me
>Nice ass Blondie we do Fiki Fiki
>Get dragged out back Club forced Fiki >Fiki.
>go to police station naked ass hole >bleeding
>Welcome Sweden we are arresting you >for not praying to Allah for your Fiki Fiki
>Im blonde Bich im Sweden Mosque >Complex prison for life for not being
>liberal enough
This is why Carriers have a screen of destroyers and cruisers around them. Also
>1 torpedo will sink a carrier
>imblyng
>inb4 swedish caliphate gets rekt by trump akin to bushes iraq war over saddams wmds
cnt w8 m8
lol its nothing to brag about, a couple years ago Australia's super shitty Collins class submarines - the ones famous for being loud as fuck - managed to sink all their ships in war games too, despite the americans cheating as well fucking kek.
>muh inpenetrable carrier group
every time
these war games were conducted with carrier groups bby
Subs are like the shark of vessels I wouldn't doubt it
How can it stay stealth if they have to surface to pray for Allah for 5 times a day ?
you are incredibly fucking retarded
in the exercies, we (THREE TIMES) penetrated USS Ronald Reagans anti-submarine screen and sank it each and every time without being detected. This was during exercises ofcourse, which ment that the crews of the USS RR and its battle group knew about the existence of a submarine in the area, which wouldnt be known in a real situation.
regarding the torpedoes;
>As for weapons, these capable little submarines feature four 533mm torpedo tubes that can fire the time-tested and heavy hitting Bofors Underwater Systems Type 613 torpedoes. The “Torpedo 613" is an incredibly powerful anti surface ship weapon, packing a range of about 12 miles, an engagement speed of 40kts and a massive high-explosive warhead weighing in at nearly about 650lbs. A newer updated multi-role heavy torpedo that can be used against both surface and submarine targets is also carried by the Gotland Class, called the ‘Torpedo 2000.’ This cutting edge weapon has double the range of the Torpedo 613, although less raw explosive power.
foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com
for further notes; you use our weapons aboard your supposedly top of the line Independence and Freedom class vessels
youtube.com
Success breed jealousy.
You're on a fucking roll mate
1. Carriers are outdated
2. The ability to sink a carrier depends on the warhead as much as the system that is used to deploy it. What kind of torpedoes do we have? Do they have nuclear warheads? Nope, so i doubt that they will actually sink a Nimitz.
Not that you need to sink it, if you slow it down they have to launch their planes with a lighter load because they don't have any wind over the bow.
/american delusion general/ ?
Swedish engineering at its finest. Cheers lad
>What kind of torpedoes do we have? Do they have nuclear warheads? Nope, so i doubt that they will actually sink a Nimitz.
please be quiet you know nothing
They can do that only in naval exercises, in which submarine detection tech is forbidden in order to not harm maritime environment.
Tell me of another nation with a population of 9 million(!) that develops and builds their own us-carrier-sinking submarines and 4th gen fighter jets.
>bbbb-b-but Muslims! B-but feminism!
>be burger
>the day finally comes
>invade Sweden
>fight off hordes of shit skins
>battle rages
>finally the burgers are victorious
>see small cottage
>time to take my spoils of war
>blonde qt inside
>kick in door
>see a figure in the corner
>its Sven
>wearing heels and a skirt
>im ready for you burger daddy
>be disgusted
>burn down house with Sven inside
Kek
Instead of torpedos they fire giant black dildos.
you know nothing, a ship of that size is extremely hard to sink. Especially if you have thousands of people running around and fixing the leaks.
Ships rely mostly on defense systems, not literal hull strength. Unless the ship was built as a tank, hadjis in little boats with rifles and pistols actually are a hazard to US Navy ships. Of course, that hazard can typically be mitigated with a fire hose.
>en.wikipedia.org
>Another key differentiation between older and modern vessels is that all modern warships are "soft", without the thick armor and bulging anti-torpedo protection of World War II and older designs.
t. Several generations of navy in the senpai
For more Swedish engineering videos;
Trackfire RWS
youtube.com
Skeldar
youtube.com
Archer
youtube.com
Ground Launched Small Diameter Bomb (GLSDB)
youtube.com
Multi-spectral tank camouflage
youtube.com
RBS15
youtube.com
>hurrr durrr we can sink one of your carriers
You don't get it. Wars aren't won by the one who gives the hardest beating, they're won by the one who can take that beating and still keep going. As long as you can keep producing/repairing ships, it doesn't matter if you lose one or two every so often.
During world war 2, the USA alone produced 6,771 ships, including 124 carriers. The Japanese? 300 ships. Total.
Wars are about logistics.
Literally any submarine can fuck up a carrier, moron. Even a U-boat would do it. That's why carriers are always escorted by destroyers at the least. It's nonsense to even expect an engagement in the first place since finding a carrier in the ocean is like finding a needle in space. Sweden would be nothing more than an airstrip for the US or Russia in any serious war. If your submarines are so great then use them to fish those Russian subs out of your water.
That's old news, carrier groups are quite vulnerable to submarines. Yet, the biggest threat for the US Navy isn't them, but those missiles China and Russia develops to deny access to their coastal line. They can't into blue water navy, there's only three countries who can do that, and two of them (UK and France) are jokes comared to the US.
>break keel of carrier in several places
>functionally useless, dangerous to just operate
>will probably sink, if not needs to be towed across the ocean to friendly port and then back to warf
>disregarding that we're talking about torpedoes and not gunfire
military1.com
How do these stealth subs fare against other subs?
in sub vs sub combat stealth is what wins the match. this is the stealthiest sub out there.
hey that's right, the navy has this kind of ultra sonar but are forbidden from using it outside of combat because it straight up kills dolphins and whales.
They've done war games with US nuclear subs, gotland wins every time.
This is clickbait that only people who don't know anything about naval warfare take seriously. Being able to sneak up on an aircraft carrier that you already know the location of in peacetime isn't impressive. You could do that in subs from the 1930s.
The issue is FINDING an enemy carrier fleet with such a submarine, catching it, penetrating the defensive web and torpedoing the carrier in wartime. If you don't understand how difficult this is, it's because you don't understand how huge the fucking ocean is. Let me go down the list for you.
>Locating enemy
How large is the Ocean? Pretty huge. How good is your surveillance apparatus of the entire fucking ocean? Probably not good. First day of the war every satellite is out, so that doesn't count. After that it's a matter of naval projection, drones/spy satellites, and naval intelligence in general. So finding an Aircraft Carrier at all is a herculean task.
>Catching it
The Nimitz class aircraft carrier's cruising speed is faster than the Gotland class Submarine's maximum speed underwater. Simply put, unless the carrier is already coming towards you, it is FASTER than your murder-sub. If you approach it at any angle except the one it's advancing in, it will outrun you.
>Penetrating the defensive web
Suffice to say that when you're at Defcon 5 anti-sub security measures aren't exactly your first priority. In wartime the scenario is VERY different, and a carrier battlegroup in waters not totally secured will be under the strictest security.
>Torpedoing it
There is no torpedo yet designed that can sink a supercarrier You'd need eight or nine of them.
Best subs are nuclear ones: you don't need to surface to get the much needed oxygen for kerosen engines, and the batteries don't discharge during fight, thus requiring resurfacing.
its almost as if these exercises are designed to come up with counters to these worst case scenarios. invisible subs aren't new. the I-400's in WW2 had a top-secret coating that made them immune to sonar at the time
in any case naval warfare is completely asymmetrical, there are always something a ship is weak against. right now I guess its subs. the carrier fleet is still going to destroy any surface vessels easily
>war games
>US participates for fun
>leaves all of the fun toys at home so they won't get reported on by international press
>US may or may not notice a Swedish sub is having fun in the water
>Sweden gets a little kick in their step because it gets reported that one sub gets to outmaneuver the big bad US Navy
>US doesn't care
Such is the way of being on top
>Implying a US carrier wouldn't be protected by over a dozen escorting destroyers and one or two of their own subs
The fucking Swede sub wouldn't even get close before having a missile launched guided torpedo shoved up it's ass
>submarine sinks ship
This seems basically as expected.
Reminder that Swedish politicians are counting on "feminist foreign policy" alone to deter Russian invasion.
this is why we mock your fall with such disgust. sweden was a nation to be envied for many years, with a strong economy, political independence, impressive feats of engineering and technology..the list goes on and on. yet the people of sweden decided that the best course of action was to let feminist morons make policy decisions and throw centuries of native tradition in the trash in favor of flooding the country with savage death cultist of the moon god
Sad!
India has 1billion +
atleast 300+ million shit in the open
you have over 33times your counties population worth of humans shitting constantly onto the environment.
You think india cares about your shitty subs when they will literally sink you in their own shit?
...
But they are stealth. We'll destroy your carriers without you even having the time to react. One nice torpedo straight through the hull and boom you're done
There has been one (1) underwater sub v sub kill in the entire history of naval warfare. There will never be another.
>doesnt care enough to beg and pay Swedish government to extend deployment time of sub so they can do more tests
>Implying a US carrier wouldn't be protected by over a dozen escorting destroyers and one or two of their own subs
but potatonigger, that was exactly the case in this exercise and they still failed
>implies a statement by a Jill Stein-tier 2% party everyone laughs at (and below the limit to have a seat in parliament) dictates foreign policy
>Best subs are nuclear ones
Only if you're planning on launching ICBMs from said sub. This is common knowledge.
Wow you're telling me a bomb could blow something up, astounding research user.
Haha good One
reminder that enormous political changes are happening right now in Swedish politics. leftism is functionally dead.
nyheteridag.se
nyheteridag.se
nyheteridag.se
Please us google translate, not archiving because of altmedia.
Pretty much any submarine can blow up a trillion dollar aircraft carrier in 5 seconds. We only build aircraft carriers to keep dat sweet military money flowing into the hands of Jews.
Literally "*teleports behind you* *unsheathes katana*".
Your subs are slower than our carriers and you won't know where they are. Sweden is a parking lot in waiting. Your existence is provided only by pretension, by people's acceptance that the existence of Sweden is normal. The slightest provocation towards you will cause your failed state to collapse, like the Ottoman Empire.
Literally anyone's submarine can sink an aircraft carrier. Those things are vulnerable as fuck which is why you have carrier groups to defend them. Call me when Sweden can properly handle a carrier group.
Sweden has a badass naval history tbqh family
>sending good officers at wargames
lel. downplaying what you can actually do is part of the game. India's been winning some airforce wargames too against US pilots for what it's worth
if digits sweden dies
kek
>nutting personnel kid
Yeah thats obviously how it works. Subs lay in wait. A carrier group is not very stealthy and its speed and direction can easily be calculated.
we dont need to handle an entire carrier group if we can penetrate said carrier group to sink the carrier itself, which is proven we could in this exercise.
>be german
>get run over
viet bantz across multiple threads are off the fucking chain tonight
>One
With four or five direct hits, you might be able to force the carrier to return to harbor for six months, because the year isn't 1914 and ships have had compartmentalized hulls since the Bismark sank.
This is all fairly immaterial, since it's like boasting that because you have developed a 9mm pistol, you could destroy the United States by shooting Donald Trump.
Don't trust Wargames. Go read about the Millennium Challenge if you want your faith in military simulations shaken forever.
Guaranteed that even if this sub is the stealthiest thing out there that the US has a naval doctrine to help find and fight it and stuff like it.
Warfare is all about doctrines that enhance your strengths/weaknesses as a country.
Small north European country can't afford massive surface navy with carrier groups etc so they concentrate on small high tech sub that in groups might be able to combat a huge blue water navy.
Similar to how WWII germany didn't have the manpower to compete with soviets so they focused on machine guns, high tech armor (radio communication) and blitzkrieg doctrine with air support and combined arms.
Current Russian tech means that they can't build stealth aircraft and fight air to air with US, so they focus on overwhelming surface to air firepower. Flying over russian anti-air stuff would be difficult even for us.
US has volunteer army and spends a ton of fucking money training soldiers to maximize flexibility and combat skills- So it adopted a doctrine going all the way back to WWII of overwhelming firepower. Ordinance is cheap, manpower is harder to replace. Instead of staying in a prolonged firefight or taking a risk to divert and flank an entrenched position the US doctrine is to call in an overwhelming force of support artillery or air strike. Our artillery and air strikes are accurate and have high effect on target we've not fought a war since maybe WWI where we didn't have the advantage in combined arms. "Shock and Awe" - leading with overwhelming air power and then mopping up with infantry, is part of this doctrine.
lol. Carriers are staging platforms. We don't fucking drive those things into battles. Wtf Sweden.
>HAHAHAHA LOOK A MUSLIM IS YOUR MAYOR
>Please ignore those hundreds of thousands of Muslims raping our women, children, burning our homes and destroying our country whilst we do nothing.
>Subs lay in wait
And destroyers go out to find them. Then your subs get destroyed and then the carriers roll in. You've had 100 years to learn that planting subs underwater doesn't work.
Fucking this, d&c faggots need to be hanged.
We are all equally getting fucked very fucking hard.
>And destroyers go out to find them.
they failed doing just that in this exercise despite knowing that a sub when a sub would be in the area and in roughly what grids.
that's not a surprise though, that's literally the job of a submarine, are you retarded?
>Americuck defenders are retarded
Not suprising desu
>being this butthurt
wow you are a thin skinned loser
You are programmed
>i didnt read the article: the post
>this sub was shipped back to Sweden on a mobile dry dock rather than making the journey on its own power.
Too many Pablos to reply to coming with the same message
"Doesnt matter if we lose a carrier, we have more"
Do you not yourself recognize how much a carrier kill is worth in propaganda and morale? First off, you can MAYBE have six carrier groups active at any one point, because of maintenance etc. Two or three of those will HAVE TO BE located in the pacific/south china sea to help ward off Chinese agression. Atleast two more would specifically be warding off Russia.
Thus taking out one carrier is a massive blow to force projection ability in that region.
Beyond that, the American public puts huge value in the existance of a carrier alone. Defeating one would be the torpedo felt around the world, and would make the American public seriously consider what the fuck they're doing. Its also well established that American willingness to fight for their country is lower than comparable nations and even "cucked" Sweden. See pic related from pew research.
You could have been the next Germany if your population increased and you stopped being the refugee dumping ground.
>neon sign at the bottom of the ocean
>scare off submarines
>a visual glowing sign
>scaring off something that uses sonar with visuals
wut?
OP has reached a new level of stupidity.
Idiot. If we actually expected you to have submarines in the water then we would send the destroyers in without carriers following them. Then your submarines are either destroyed or the hunt continues until the waters are safe enough for the carriers.
>wut?
real life trolling
You have to know where something is in order to predict its course. Your problem is that you are taking a simulation of a red scenario to be indicative of actual war. Let me explain what this happened.
What happened was that a carrier and escorts were parked, probably somewhere around Norway, and a Swedish submarine was sent to infiltrate the fleet and get a targeting solution on the carrier. The crews were told what was happening and ran detection drills to ensure that they obeyed protocol. The submarine did what it was designed to do and slipped through the net, and gained a firing solution.
But that isn't indicative of what happens in reality, that's indicative of what happens if everything that leads up to the submarine catching a stationary carrier battlegroup first occurs. It's like running a wargame where Spetznaz has already entered the White House to kill Donald Trump. Can the SS fend off a heavily armored special forces unit? Probably not. Can a heavily armed special forces unit get into the White House? Even less likely.
In reality a carrier battlegroup sits somewhere 120 kilometers off of the coast, moving at 20 knots while its planes fly sorties, and a swarm of destroyers, spy planes and submarines occupy all space between it and the coast. In order to get a microsub to it you would essentially need to send them out at random and hope you found one, or else gain aereal reconaissance (unlikely) or pull some Naval Intelligence magic and catch a Marine instagramming from the deck of the Reagan (more likely) and use that to figure out where the ship is.
But every part of that is more difficult than simply torpedoing an aircraft carrier, which might not even cripple it.
you mean the same swedish submarine that is crewed by diversity hires and runs itself into the seafloor?
>war scenario
>w-we would just keep our carriers at home
Are you retarded?