The POS submarine as you call it is a diesel which is quieter than a nuclear submarine when on batteries. There are many articles discussing this problem. Here’s one of them. Countries like China are buying established submarines from Russia and applying acoustic tiles and low cavitation propellers.
As I said before, the US has had to rent a diesel sub for a couple of years to study the problem.
So you’re saying that this event did not happen as reported and that David Axe and The Diplomat site are wrong? Other articles I’ve read on that site have seemed reasonably well informed.
You’re based this on ???
That’s exactly what I’m saying. I can’t get into details but those subs aren’t very quiet. When they leave port, we know.
You can thank me later.
Haha I don’t need google.
D1a1s1<------- Sonar technician submarines, USN, currently stationed on the island of Guam. You can thank me now 
A ballistic trajectory at mach 4? Sounds doable, assuming sufficient warning. The thing is, it’s not that easy to track a carrier task force even with satellites. And what’s the range of that missile? Does the carrier have to be stupid-dumb to actually come within 100 miles of the Chinese shore?
So we rented the Swedish Navy’s HMS Gotland for 2 years because the navy was short people on their softball team?
You’re partially correct. Just because its a diesel does not mean its necessarily quiet. There are a lot of factors that go into building and operating a diesel. China is just not quite there in either case. The subs they bought from Russia are extremely old tech. They reverse engineer them and try to make improvements but again, not quite there when compared with a Virginia class, Seawolf class, or late model LA.
As far as renting a diesel. Cite? This topic is my job and I never heard of such a thing.
Damn! That happens to you too huh.
Sheesh man, I dunno. What with ant-ships, truck launched BUMs, and intercontinental ponds this military stuff sure makes a guy confused…and hungry. Hows about another one of those deep fried missiles. 
Is there some secret method of hiding a 1000 foot vessel from a satellite that you’d like to share with us? Considering the resolution that google uses for their maps is WAAAAAY below military satellite resolution I’d be interested in this information.
As far as the US not coming within 100 miles of Chinese shores you might want to measure the distance from the mainland China to Hong Kong.
Some posts have noted the OP accidentally put the word ant in the title line. But it might be an apt error. Admiral Yamamoto once said, “There is no such thing as an unsinkable ship. The fiercest serpent may be overcome by a swarm of ants.”
That’s the basic principle of sinking a modern capital ship. You don’t try to go one-on-one against it. You launch dozens of simultaneous attacks against it and overwhelm its defenses. You attack a defense system that’s 99% perfect with a hundred missiles.
And any claims that we have a defense system that’s 99% perfect in real world conditions are almost certainly wrong. Most systems have a hard time being that good in test conditions designed to make them work.
American Phoenix missiles have a range of over 120 miles. And that’s forty year old technology.
As for American ships staying over a hundred miles off China’s shore, it’s going to be tough to do that and defend the Taiwan Strait.
the subs they bought are NOT old tech. They bought Kilo class submarines of both the 877 and 636 models. The more advanced models are acoustically tiled.
As for the rented diesel sub I gave you the name of it (HMS Gotland). You can google that to your heart’s content. Here’s a cite from the US Navy.
Hey look man. Like I said. I deal with these things for a living. You can google all day long but in the end, I’m out there doing it. Just because you can run a google search doesn’t mean you’re informed. You need to have more faith in us. I can assure you they don’t have the acoustic advantage. I can assure you when it comes to submarining we’ve got it covered. So sit back relax and go google something else.
Carriers move. And no one’s supposed to know where a carrier task force is presently at. But anyway. Assuming the TF is picked up in the latest sat sweep, what if the land-based missile launchers are off by several miles in either direction of the seaboard?
What I’m, saying is land missile systems are hard put to track and take out a target in the ocean. Subs, strike planes and surface units do that.
Soviet mil-tech was way ahead of the Chinese now and did they design a land-based missle system against the carriers? They had backfire and badger bombers but not mobile missile launchers. :rolleyes:
Besides bombers, the soviets built up its attack sub fleet so that there were 1.3 Kursk/Alpha subs per US carrier. These subs shadowed the TFs and were to attack once they received a radio signal telling the the US and USSR were at war. Of course the TF would have its own hunter-killer subs ready to fire their torpedoes should the soviet subs flood their missile/torp tubes.
If you deal with this for a living and weren’t aware of the rented Swedish sub which is common knowledge then… I have to conclude you don’t know what you’re talking about.
Haha I can’t wait to tell my friends about the guy who thinks we rented a submarine to learn about submarines. If you’re American you need to defect to China and take all your google knowledge with you.
That article referenced to a joint training op. We do that with numerous countries every year. It wasn’t so we could solely learn about diesels haha that’s rich.
I’m done with you. Please. Go argue with someone else.
You can’t hide a carrier. Can’t be done. Between Geosynchronous satellites, standard orbit satellites, drones, submarines, “fishing vessels”, and aircraft it’s simply impossible. The Russians have overflown carriers twice in the same week.
And it’s already been pointed out that a modern GPS is accurate to within a few feet. This isn’t 1970 where spy satellites had to drop film off. It’s all in real time with enough accuracy to read the printing on the side of aircraft.
In 2004, the Swedish government received a request from the United States of America to lease HMS Gotland – Swedish-flagged, commanded and manned, for a duration of one year for use in anti-submarine warfare exercises. The Swedish government granted this request in October 2004, with both navies signing a memorandum of understanding on March 21, 2005.[5][6] The lease was extended for another 12 months in 2006.
You’re completely full of shit. There is no way you could be involved in ANYTHING to do with submarines and not know this.
Thanks for updating me on that. Now, does the missile system have enough range and speed to launch and hit wherever the carrier appears offshore? You see, a carrier can operate mid-ocean.