Russia’s newest Yasen class submarines: US carriers' biggest nemesis?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 16 พ.ย. 2021
- Thanks to MANSCAPED for sponsoring today's video! Get 20% OFF + Free International Shipping + 2 Free Gifts with promo code "BINKOV20" at mnscpd.com/binkov
The quiet hunters of the deep, the nuclear power fueled submarines are often the big worry for US admirals. And after decades of lagging behind US designs, Russia has finally perfected its best hunter killer sub. The Yasen class. Is it the real carrier killer?
Images used in thumbnail:
Model Yasen-class submarine at the exhibition «Army 2016»
By LeAZ-1977, CC BY-SA 4.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/...)
USS Enterprise (CVN-80) artist depiction, By U.S. Navy, Public domain
Music by Matija Malatestinic www.malatestinic.com
Go to / binkov if you want to help support our channel. And enjoy the perks such as get access to our videos with no ads and get early access to various content.
Suggest country pairs you'd like to see in future videos over at our website: www.binkov.com
You can also browse for other Binkov T-Shirts or Binkov merch, via the store at our website, binkov.com/
Subscribe to Binkov's channel for more videos! / binkovsbattlegrounds
Follow Binkov's news on Facebook! / binkovsbattlegrounds
Follow us on Twitter: / commissarbinkov
![[TH] VCT Masters Shanghai Playoffs DAY 6 // G2 vs GEN | 100T vs TH](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/M6jxF80AajI/mqdefault.jpg)
![Genshin Impact | กาชา Clorinde ไวฟุนั้น ควร C6 [เทสตัวละครต่อ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/SOVaBvL7K20/mqdefault.jpg)
Get 20% OFF + Free International Shipping + 2 Free Gifts with promo code "BINKOV20" at mnscpd.com/binkov
What if 1940 Belgium was sent back to 1914.
Do vids about bout ESTONIA vs the WORLD
do a entire big video vid About Bout A Much more powerful stronger and better armed ESTONIA VS THE WHOLE WORLD with equipments from 1800s 1900s 2000s 2010s and beyond like in 1880s ww1 ww2 cold war and etc equipments aswell as having more industries factories workforce forces more manpower and etc stuff id like to see if estonia could survive and take lands and tens hundreds thousands and millions worth of stocks of armaments and etc
BASICALLY SUPER MEGA TOTAL SUPERIORITY MUCH MORE POWERFUL AND STRONGER ESTONIA
Make a discord server
are you gonna do some analysis on Poland-Belarus or not?
Best Manscaped promotion I've ever seen. I didnt' realise I needed to see a frog puppet promote the product ROFL
Does the manscaper work on Felt?
Or is the _fabric defuzzer lint remover_ sold separately?
The real carrier killer is the friends we made along the way
You can't lose a carrier if you don't have any in the first place
You got a fren in me Mr hunter killer
Bro it's aircraft carrier not carier
That's.... Actually pretty meaningful
Booooooom
To everyone in the comments section who says that there is no way for a submarine to sink a modern super carrier, keep this in mind: a submarine doesn't have to actually sink the carrier to remove it as a threat. If the sub can just damage it to the point that the carrier is listing to one side or the other and aircraft can no longer operate safety from the deck, that is still a mission kill.
It’s brutally simple to kill a large ships. If a cavity forms, at the right point of the keel of the vessel, her weight will snap her. It’s just physics.
Now, getting close enough to a modern carrier…
Actually, the mere threat of the submarine will force the enemy to significantly invest into carrier defences and contribute ships and aircraft and submarines to defend said carrier.
Meaning additional expenses and lost mission capabilities. So a 2 billion dollar sub forces US assets worth 30 billion to defend a carrier.
Also there is that thing where they’re talking out of their ass, they have no idea if the subs can or can’t
@@H33t3Speaks you don't need to get close to a carrier now. There is missiles russia invented now that you can maneuver
The problem there is shear tonnage of the CVN. it takes a lot of firepower to do so
Secondly you have remember the skill of the crew
The HMS Sheffield was hit by single Exocet and sank days later
The USS Stark by 2 Exocet but remained afloat.
The difference was poor damage control by the Sheffield crew doomed the ship whereas excellent damage control by Stark crew saved the ship.
Honestly, the craziest thing in this video was that a US sub apparently recorded all their sensor data at high enough fidelity that post-mission analysis could find the Chinese sub after the fact. That implies that the physical sonar microphones are already sensitive enough to detect the quiet chinese subs, and all it takes is better signal processing. Not *that* long ago, we didn't have the ability to easily record the sensor data in super high fidelity, or at least not very much of it. At the end of the cold war, I think it still would have been basically recorded on audio tapes. And that late cold war gear stayed in service a shockingly long time.
Military tends to have very long cycles for hardware refresh, so it may take a decade to deploy last year's systems. But at least in theory, it would be a lot easier to drop in some new computers with some GPU's and upgraded software than to cut the hull open and install a new sensor dome. Who knows what signal processing they are actually doing in the after-mission analyses, but there's no fundamental reason it would be impossible to run on the sub. (You've got access to plenty of power and cooling on a nuke boat. And you'd be replacing bulky 10+ year old equipment, so even the cramped space on a sub is enough for a lot of compute.)
Dood, even a windoze shtbox can do supreme audio forensics ...contrary to what was said in the idiot post about armchair generals above.
So many experts in the comments section: Generals, Admirals, and Naval Fleet Commanders. Must be nice to have security clearance in both US and Russia.
Can you name one? What are you talking about???
@@MrFlatage damn, re check the Comment section again, you will see alot of armchair warriors..
@@grixjay8620 What the fudge? Dude who writes 'Comment' in the middle of a sentence? Any 1st grader with a 3 digit IQ knows better. And you are a 'armchair warrior'?? Official source proving that you are what you claim you are? I never heard of any such rank in any military, lmao!
@Dick Izzinya Haha so you went to some kinda 'Academy'? Come on they didn't even teach you how to end sentences. When I swore the oath in my lands of the free to my flag, the mighty red, white and blue? They didn't hand out any chairs. We had to pass a written test you know.
@@MrFlatage my jesus christ man, what's wrong with you? O was only referring to the 'Comment section' why are u so mad? I didn't even tried to criticize you, can't believe that you got so much butthurt over a single mistake.. jeez u gotta grow up man
I kind of hate how the majority of comments on this channel are people thinking they know a lot while they obviously don't...
Welcome to the Internet.
Honestly, i think the situation for US and sub detection might be even worse than y'all think it is.
According to my dad (Who works for TKMS and has been involved in the design and production of the german 214 and 216 submarines, though he says a lot of things of questionable validity, and of course i'm a random stranger on the internet who cannot verify the above statement, so do take this with a grain of salt), exercises with NATO allies wherein individual NATO submarines stand in for russian and chinese subs have shown that even subs that should be easily detected by the US can get into lethal attack range by using whats essentially the same strategy the Kriegsmarine used against convoys in WW2. Position yourself infront of the fleet, hold your position in silent running, and wait until they're right above you. Then, you're free to launch an attack from within, crash dive, and gtfo before anyone has time to react to your attack. Sure, nowadays the gtfo part might not work that well anymore, but i'm pretty sure sacrificing a sub for a carrier is a net positive for the one who loses the sub.
Except for the guys on the sub.
Should the US invest even more into it's military?
Do you call your dad Comrade Dad?
Good points, but if gtfo cant work anymore, it is hard to be sure of a naval strategy in which martyrdom plays a key role
That tactic doesn't work as well for nuclear submarines because their relatively noisy machinery can't easily be shut down and they may find it difficult to hide in the clutter from the seafloor due to their size and the risk of clogging up the vital seawater intakes with particulates. Then again, nukes are also generally much faster so the GTFO part works better for them
Also, under ideal conditions it may be possible to make a torpedo attack without the launch being heard and giving away your position, in which case you could send the enemy escorts off on a wild goose chase by programming the torpedoes to come in from a different direction than your submarine, buying time for you to GTFO
Kaliber, Onyx, Zirckon.. Those are some seriously bad ass missile designations.
Haha. When the US navy requests another budget upgrade they'll just show the politicians binkov videos.
I love how most of russian strategy nowadays is to overwhelm the enemy with missile dakka
Always has been. :D
Well to be fair that is really your only option to get past potent air defences if you insist on using missiles
Everyone in this comment section is smoking crack
The country to watch is India !! 🇮🇳
What u mean? This is youtube comment section. Everyone is an expert here.
I have never seen so many former submarine commanders and admirals before in one place. :D
Reason why Yasen has screw, Borei has pumpjet is connected to operation depth. Borei has operation depth 450 meters, Yasen has operation depth 800 meters. Pumpjet is very inefficient in those depths compared to classic screw. Generally truning point between pumpjet/screw is around 500 meters.
OP, read this dude.
@@rocketchicken5421 ?
When a general puppet informs you bout taking care of balls hair... you know future is gonna be awsome
I would love to see A Military comparison between India and Pakistan ❤ and your videos are very informative 👍👍💯
1:42 to skip ad
The real carrier killer is reality of trying to get anything through Congress and the Senate without a lot of haircuts..
Apparently it has not interfered that much because the US has by far the most carriers of any country. Never mind that the price of one of those monstrosities would be enough to solve world hunger
So having military spendings 10 times of the next 10 countries combined and external debt the planet never seen ever is not enough?
Ironically, you will need to borrow more money from China for that.
Lol you're so wrong, ask the israelis
@@RustedCroaker comparing the amount of money the US spends compared to China or Russia is a bad comparison due to needs as well as the difference in the cost of things in the US vs Russia and China.
@@RustedCroaker it’s like comparing the cost of living in CA versus West Virginia.
Binkov manscaped ad is cursed
Subs have always been the biggest threat to carriers. That's why at lest one multi billion dollar sub is assigned to protect it, more if the threat is higher, and that anti submarine capabilities are part of the air wing
Well done Binkov. This could well be your best analysis I've seen.
Russia got a milling machine from Toshiba. It enabled Russia to make its subs significantly quieter .
It’s difficult to make any assessments about submarine capabilities as the information is extremely secretive. A positive for the US is that many of its allies have very quiet subs, which the US can test against and learn from. The Gotland is a good example. It was able to penetrate carrier defenses and repeatedly strike against a US carrier. The US ended up leasing the sub and its crew for two years to learn how to counter such technology. It’s good to have allies like Sweden that are willing to be so helpful.
Defending yourself from European and anglosphere imperialism is unacceptable
@@destroyerarmor2846 What about defending from Russian and Chinese Imperialism? :D
Excellent presentation.
One wonders how well the Russians will be able to hide attack submarines that are
2-3 bigger than their competitors - Specially when they get older.
They wont and their navy is a joke
Binkov, as always, excellent video
Very interesting discussion about naval technologies, and current advancement !
In an actual war Russia would probally just use missiles with nuclear tips to deal with aircraft carriers.
Types of people in the comment section:
1. Military freaks
2. US patriots
3. Haters (most against China)
4. Trolls
What the popcorn is for, you get extra content in the comments!
Really? Because so far I've only seen the Russian Patriots and Anti-Americans. You must be reading a different comment section
@@chaosXP3RT
I personally enjoy the ones that think Russia has God weapons. Same with China.
These missiles make carriers obsolete! Proceeds to start building their own carrier capabilities.
@@chaosXP3RT LOL! Look harder boy. There's a legion of "USA Strong" fanboys in here.
@@icecold9511 Exactly. I dont get the nonsense either. IF they are dead then why "copy" and build them? It's not like the USA if we lose a carrier is just gonna throw its hands in the air and say "You got us." and give up. We have plenty of alternative options and the money to wield them. If USA loses a carrier then Russia and China can rest assured they will lose a lot more tonnage for its lose.
The quiestest Yasen subs of all were those that were ordered and not delivered...
Was any new weapon system ever delivered on time outside a war?
Reading the comments where people are disparaging Russian military hardware I am reminded of something CNA Russian Analyst Michael Kofman had to say when he talked about the poor performance of Russia in Ukraine: "For most of my career I had to try and convince people that the Russian military is not 12 feet tall, now I need to convince people that the Russian military is not 4 feet tall".
Dismissing Russia because of the disaster in Ukraine is very shortsighted (after all, are we going to say that the US military sucks because of its disastrous retreat from Afghanistan?). Russia is still a very capable adversary and, no doubt, will learn from its mistakes in Ukraine (which it seems to have already done looking at their recent performance in the Donbas Region).
Agreed. I think there are some holes in Russian strategy (seem to still be using the Soviet technique of throwing bodies at the problem) but to treat them as if they would not be a capable adversary is foolish.
Decent is still only 5ft tall man
The difference is nearly 200k american soldiers in Afghanistan would’ve kept the taliban out of power meanwhile nearly 200k Russians can barely make pushes due to terrible logistics among many other problems
Also one more thing to keep in mind only a few thousand Americans died in Afghanistan over the course of YEARS! Russia has more then tripled that number in less then a few months
@@xsad7250 Good points. I must, however disagree a little bit (but only a bit). The quality of the Ukrainian military should not be ignored. I don't think it's too controversial to state that the Ukrainians are infinitely better fighters than the Taliban ever were. In my view the Russians' failure in Ukraine has far more to do with extremely poor intelligence (that is to say they didn't bother to understand that Ukraine in 2022 is not the same Ukraine as in 2014) than with any material defects that the Russian army may be suffering.
Also, the Russians went for a high risk high reward strategy: They went straight towards Kyiv, ignoring logistic constraints, poor road quality etc with the hope of deposing the Ukrainian government. Once this strategy failed, the Russians were basically screwed. I don't think Russia has any realistic hope of winning the war now. The best they may manage is capturing Donbas and then suing for peace.
Binkov talking about ball deodorant made me spit out my coffee.
Designer: so how quiet you wanna be?
Yasen: Yas
Great tech and stuff but limited quantities as usual for Russian military stuff lol. They always brag and never can mass produce lol.
@@joserodriguezjr.6422 They already built 4 out of a class of 10, on top of this a successor is already in design. Do you just pull things from your ass and hope for it to be true?
@@arandomcrusader-9355 that's a first....besides nukes, vodkas, and AKs...😆
@@joserodriguezjr.6422 Agree, coz Zumwalt, LCS, Seawolf, such hitech, much produced, wow
Enjoyed this video very much great job look forward to seeing more like this one
As much as I like your videos I don’t really agree with all.. Russia really wasn’t lagging behind in terms of subs, the akula class was a sub ahead of his time
Damn good presentation. That Yasen class sub is one handsome SOB.
"We're still years ahead of the Russians and Chinese, they don't even have gender neutral bathrooms"
- the people running the US Navy
That the biggest problem in American military when their solders have a difficult in choosing the right bathroom to use or trying to figure out if they are a male or female.
Very informative!! 😊👍
Binkov, you're the best!
There’s something that was so funny with Binkov talking next to a box that said your balls will thank you.
The US virginia block V is going to be the best attack sub in the world. It's having a size increase to 140 meters giving it larger and more torpedo tubes, it's also getting four extra VLS tubes to carry missiles. The best feature is it will get the HAWC and LRHW giving it hypersonic anti ship and land attack abilities. Similar too the Yassen.
US and Russian subs are the best in the world. And British too I guess, since they get to use our tech.
Thank You For Reminding Me
Um, the US has 67 of 82 Arleigh Burke-class destroyers. Needing 6 per each of the 9 carrier strike groups currently in service would be 54 destroyers. That does cut down on the number of spare ones for other flotillas, so maybe the US Navy should look at building more destroyers. Did you take into account the presence of one to two US subs per carrier strike group being present for detection?
I agree, too bad they burned lots of dollars with the worthless littoral combat ship program.
@@abc64pan It didn't turn out completely worthless, but they should have done a tech demonstrator for the whole next generation of ships instead of diving right into production. Currently, they have a design that works and will be produced, but they are a niche ship for the US Navy and are basically a replacement for light frigates. The tech in them, now that it has been ironed out, is actually pretty good and results in less crew, more function, and more flexibility.
The branch that really won out on the littoral ships is the US Coast Guard. They needed a new class of ships and these will work nicely for them, especially since they use less crew.
BTW, the crew quarters modular units for them are damn spacious for a military vessel. The enlisted have bigger quarters than most officers on other ships.
American is 40 year plus in tech but still got slap 👋 by Talibans with Ak47 wearing flip flops 🩴
So did the Soviet Union
Afghanistan is known as "the graveyard of empires" for a reason.
Hard to fight an enemy that looks exactly like the people you're there to help
@@Kurena storm 333
@@Kurena But wasn't the soviet union poor? The USA is super filthy rich with $800 billion annual defence budget. Still got its cheeks clapped.
Very good and informative presentation. (except the ad)
Binkov, great advertising dude! I followed the link and ordered to help support your channel 👍🏾
1:39 “Balls not included in the package”
*Ah I see what you did there…*
Interesting Video
good stuff. thanks for that
*We are off to the comments lets see what tue "experts" have to say*
Hi from Severodvinsk )😎✋
Keep these super videos coming please
That manscaped ad though XD
*Hardbass submarine 9000*
Peace through superior firepower always works :)
Very nice!
A major black box are teh algorithms used to filter noise and increase the signal to noise ratio. This a top secre and rarely discussed component of sonar analysis, possibly because only a few mathematicians truly understand it.
Techncially, you do not need more escort ships to protect the carrier, but ships that can carry more aircraft with deployable sonar buoys or helicopters with both deployable sonar buoys and dipping sonar (or possibly teh more complex variable depth towed array system). A catapult carrier has teh advantage with regards to heavy fixed-wing aircraft with lot sof expendable sonar buoys and long endurance.
Armed with 3m32 zircon & 3m54 Kaliber cruise missiles it is a Carrier killer
a barrage of both means by by Carrier
Kaliber should be relatively easy to shoot down with Aegis and with last ditch Phalanx, unless a very large number are incoming. Zircon would be a different story - if it works as well as advertised.
@@myke5696 a barrage of both
Brave man, to speak confidently of any Russian weapon actually functioning against a first world adversary. They can't get most of their missiles through to hit targets in Ukraine, a nation slaughtering the Russians with mostly tech from the eighties. The bulk of the weapons in use are not, actually, modern NATO weapons, but the same old obsolete soviet stuff. And Russias vaunted modern miotary supertech is falling flat on it's face.
Also, Carriers are protected by a far more effective thing. The USA has announced that US carriers are to be regarded as 'American soil', meaning they will treat an attack upon a carrier the same as they would treat an attack on an American town or city. Imagie what will happen to the nation that lands a 'missile barrage' on 1/12 of the American carrier fleet? The phrase 'apocalyptic overkill retaliation' comes to mind.
What protects carriers more than anything else is that you can't kill them all, and the ones you don't get are coming for you. Along with a whole lot more, and all of it determined to ensure that since some moron was dumb enough to 'fuck around', they will now 'find out' in ways that people will speak of in hushed tones for generations.
@@charlesparr1611 dream on if you think the URAINIANS ARE KILLING 1000S of Russians it is propaganda Ukraine has lost 110,000 dead there have not been that many Russian troops in Ukraine until last month,Doug mac Gregor knows more than u plus i have mates on the ground both former special forces killing nazis in Ukraine they know more than u
@@jasonbrittain3316 Sure. We all believe you. Run along, I think I heard your mum calling you.
With quantitative diminishment of ASW capability to being with, SIGNIFICANTLY increased background noise and ocean warming, even tracking late '90s proj.971 would become more difficult. In any case - solution is quite obvious. While using passive sonar on carrier is counterproductive in most cases, as is silencing it.... these still should have something that would use carrier's own noise as sounding signa and use e.g. Italian minitorpedoes (or even MU-90 impact with anti-torpedo option) for self defence, last chance underwater RAM/Phalanx if you will. In time, perhaps, supercaviating rounds....
Yasqueen submarine
the cold war never really ended did it?
Honestly the only real threat these subs pose is if they sell them to China and China reverse engineers them. Russia simply doesnt have the economy to produce these at the scale they need to matter. Hopefully Russia has learned from the Sukhoi bootlegging experience.
Dont worry!..just one of them armed with tsirkon hipersonic is enough to wipe off an entire US Naval battle group included the air carrier....
They've built 2 so far, are building 5 and plan 3 more before 2030. They planned 10 in all. That's more than enough man...economics doesn't matter when it's national security. They have the money if they want to, they're just going thru a stagnation
That was pretty damn good
I luv binkov😍
Aircraft Carriers do not operate without attach submarines in the battle group. Your scenario How about a god video of Yasen vs Virginia with an emphasis on how undersea combat actually works. You have good explanations here.
May wanna look up the Gotland.
1 or 2 subs, and its not sufficient mostly, the best asw defence ships have are asw heli and TAS etc.
1 or 2 Subs cant cover the fleet and the cover isnt necessarily sufficient for a sub waiting to hit an ac
@@hiteshadhikari
Exept if a sub is quiet enough that doesn't matter now does it
@@rzu1474 tbh back when gotland hit the carrier in excercise it was time when american ASW was at its piss poor state, they had for years not invested in asw as soviet threat was no more. It taught america a lesson back then and they invested heavily on asw with p8 and what not but yeah, subs alone arent a big game changer
Against sub attacks on ac that is
Nothing like watching videos of what might kill me just before I ship out.
Gotta love yer ad!- 2 funny!
I liked the part about the trimmer 😎😁
Great Video! Even with the puppet, I like it way better that those other ones thrown to together with fake data and fake AI voice overs.
A puppet talking about shaving balls, legendary
Ha ha...BINKOV commercials Rock...best commercial Ive seen in ages
Reminds me of the sea battle in the 2nd series of Last Ship where a Astute Class goes against an Arleigh Burke Class destroyer.
Is there not a requirement for carrier based anti-submarine fixed wing aircraft? I know this was the case during the cold war with the s-2 tracker and later s-3 Viking but they have left service without a replacement - probably because the threat lessened after the fall of USSR. Would there be a benefit of a next generation version let's say and "S-4" with sophisticated ASW capabilities and potentiaially unmanned?
The Swedes hunted and killed a carrier with a diesel sub, it can’t be that hard .
That sent our Navy into meltdown mode with that exercise Lol
That wasn't out in an oceanic scenario, the Baltic is a shooting gallery with a lot of clutter, in the blue water things are very, very different and a diesel sub is largely a sitter.
Also America completely owns LEO above any of it's battle groups, it'll be hard dangerous work getting an accurate shot off on a air group steaming around at 70 kmph, or more.
Yup good point. Hopefully we've learned from that, and one tactic I've thought about is get expendable unmanned drones and have them go active sonar in a threatening environment. I think active sonar would allow trianguation onto diesel subs.
This is good
that sub has a good looking profile.
Carriers arent "front line assets" against peer or near peer adversaries.
Against a major power their job will be defensive, they wont be forward deployed.
America is going with long range ,land based aircraft and attack subs for controlling the seas during a hot war.
So while Russia and China are fixated on countering Carrier strike groups , it will be land based B-21's sinking their ships and P-8's dropping torpedos on their subs.
Given the large number of P-8's already in service around the world , and the large number of orders on the books
( Australia already has 14 ) submarines are going to have difficulty operating beyond their own countries air cap.
Brinkov could you do a analysis about the South African Boarder War in Namibia against Angola?
They will also carry the newer hypersonic anti-ship missiles in the VLS system...
Morning Binkov,
You made a mistake in your video at the 9:08 mark. Dedicated VLS capabilities are integrated into Virginia Block III variants from SSN-784 and onwards. There are two payload modules near the bow of the submarine in which six Tomahawks are carried in each module.
Wait really? I thought it could carry 7, one in the middle and 6 around it in each VLS cell.
Wait Virginia BLK 3?
We need to see a collab with Sub Brief, or at least a reaction video
I think the reason they dropped the 650mm is because it sank more russian subs than the russians sank anything at all during the cold war.
I don't think anything was sunk during the cold war, it wouldn't have been a cold war if there were sinking's
@@Vanyali that is literally my point.
This is the military industrial complex asking for more funding.
Pumpjets have several pro's and con's to regular propellers, and russian have went into some different ideas about what is best for them. About efficency in the end i just could guess russians have developed the 212A-class with the germans and surely toke some ideas back home - and the 212A, the most silent sub at the time, also still has a propeller(so russiand and germans at last come together on this idea of what is most efficent, and it's not only tradition or something like that).
Rubin makes seriously impressive vessels. I'd be worried about that line of submarines for sure.
The Virginia class has had VLS tubes since the start, the class didn't just start getting them with Block V.
Video idea: Poland vs Belarus. The time fits i think.
*I thought this channel was supposed to be entertainment not crystal ball predictions*
Oh i still remember BALLular add we had half-a-year ago :D
Cool sub👍
The fleet could just buy a bunch of trawlers retrofitted with radar stealth in mind that would simply drag a net around the fleet.
I wonder what real Russian And American military analysts would be thinking about the comment section of this video
"I thought I knew something about military, but I'm gonna resign now" - that one chief analyst from the Pentagon reading this comment section
I've been reading "Blind Man's Bluff" by Sherry Sontag and Christopher Drew. It talks about the original US Submarine Service and the exploits they managed over the years of the Cold War.
interesting to hear about the Yasen class subs in the context of that book.
Read it too. Every military should read it. Try, The Downing of flight 007. CIA top level plan. Sick humor on flight designation: 007. Killed a congressman so things went bad in a lot of ways.
Back in my day Victor IIIs were a real threat.
Manscape is a con waste of money
I learned the hard way
Here's my point: What gets overlooked by many commentators and also the presenter of this video is the fact that in order to lead you must act and not react. The presenter and many commentators here only talk in terms of how and to what extent Russia's subs might or might not threaten US naval assets. But this is reactive thinking, tacitly assuming that Russia must respond to the challenges the US sets. An active approach on any side (and here we're talking about the Russian side) would be not to respond to standards or challenges set by others but to set own challenges by creating own solutions from scratch, thereby setting a pace that needs to be outsmarted by a possible adversary. One example might be the pump jet configuration. Here the argument goes like this: many NATO subs have pump jet configuration, which is apparently super cool. So shouldn't the Russian subs have it too? Why not? Perhaps pump jet configuration is simply a fad like the supposed invincible stealth of the F-35. Perhaps it is a fad one can do very well without and not an essential property of a successful submarine which may lay elsewhere. A historic example of that I mean is the Maginot line. The Nazi approach to this challenge was not to develop sophisticated means of breaching this fortification but to simply walk around it. Perhaps the presenter of this video could have addressed the issue from the opposite point of view by asking how and by what means to US could and should respond to the challenges set by the newly emerging Russian subs. This might have been a fruitful approach.
Russia can't challenge us, only react and keep them spending because we don't have enough money to build carrier strike groups, but we have enough to destroy them. As a russian citizen.
I remember we had issues finding a particular Akula back in 05...lol...crazy times. I can only imagine the Yasen compared to back then.
If you follow Sub brief who is a retired U.S. Navy sonarman (i highly recommend you watch him), they're extremely silent and way better armed than our subs sadly.
Thx I'll check him out...also former sonarman here as well.
Your channel is dope!
Talking up threats from advanced Russian Submarines sounds like a good way to make sure the budget for military spending remain flush with cash.... just sayin'
all carriers are seating ducks. its useful to intimidate before war. once war starts it got sunk like in WW2 Battle of Midway.
sunk by carriers?
Carriers are seating ducks but they are no where near useless thats why you allways see a task force accomponying the carrier
Not sure what I found more entertaining the tactical whale on the map or binkov peddling ball trimmers
Wonder what the new Aussies subs tech will be based on?
No ship is invincible
The Kitty Hawk-class aircraft carrier; the USS America took 4 weeks of pounding by air-to-surface missiles, surface-to-surface missiles and torpedoes. There were no onboard crew to conduct damage control. They were unable to sink it, but they used the information and incorporated it into the design of the new Ford-class supercarriers to increase it's survivability.
Gotland class, S80 and U212 class submarines have sunk US carriers inside strike groups in many simulations. AIP submarines are less noisy than nuclear subs so they remain the bigger threat to carriers although they would not be able to pursue strike groups at thigh speeds over long distances.
i think the US rented it from norway or whoever uses them to learn how to get better at avoiding them
That's a good point. Maybe the US will adapt by having more expendable drone platforms that can use active sonar at times of threat. Probably active sonar would find those deisel subs.
You understand that those exercises don't actually show that Sweden holds the carrier's life in their hands right? Those simulations and exercises have very specific setups designed to examine specific characteristics. The AIP subs are impressive, but they also had to nerf the carrier group and load artificial advantages on to the subs to get the scenarios they needed to test specific things. Yes, they are VERY quiet. They also have top speeds of 5-10 knots at most while being quiet.
The boats did not have to penetrate a moving carrier group. Good thing, as that would be completely impossible. That carrier can do 45-50 knots when it wants to.
An AIP sub cannot just steam up to a carrier and blow it out of the water, and that infamous event doesn't begin to claim it can. The only thing it showed was that AIP subs could be quieter than some people thought, and it was worth looking at. Otherwise, it has as much to do with actual naval capabilities and tactics as the famous gun-range dogfights between f22 and f35 and the f16 had to do with setting up tactics for modern air combat. Ie zero.
Yes the f16 is a great dogfighter, and yes it made mincemeat out of the new expensive stealth fighters. This is not all that shocking, since they were designed to fight the battles they will actually see, and have already been seeing for a decade or more, and simply will not engage in a gunfight under any circumstances. Pilots kill each other from much further distances nowadays, and while the f16 still has utility, in the presence of modern BVR stealth platforms it is no longer a predator, but at best a missile truck. It's going to enjoy it's twilight years in a support role, hauling ordnace and firing it so the Lightnings (damnit, my sleek p38 gave it's name to the ugliest fighter I know of? Travesty!) can assume control of them in BVR combat. Carrying extra fuel for the new hotness, being sent on errands... it's the lot of the obsolete.
I'm sure that, if they've been good, they will be allowed to go for a run and shoot down some second world legacy bogs once in a while, and yarn about the old days...