strategic value of having a fleet of tank/troop transport subs.
- Thread starter tidalwave
- Start date
The Japanese had a similar idea with their sen toku i 400 super sub to attack the West Coast of the U.S.in the latter half of WW2 but because the hangar was on the deck, it had to be a twin hull design to prevent it from capsizing.
kwaigonegin
Colonel
Another reason why 'carrier' subs are not practical is due to the inherent nature of extreme risk. If you load a ton of men and material into a couple of giant mother'subs' a single torpedo, accident or mechanical failure would signicantly reduce your assets and offensive fighting capabilities.. and if such sub were to surface for whatever reason it will be easy pickings.
Too much too lose for lil gain.
Too much too lose for lil gain.
SouthernSky
Junior Member
Sitting in a sub full of J-P8 and munitions. There's a recruiting poster for you!
Not very practical. I mean, who would you be invading? If it's a superpower like China, one neutron bomb and that whole fleet goes bottom up. If it's not a superpower, you can do the same thing with LHA/D's etc.
Sorry, the use of a neutron bomb (which is a nuclear bomb) to destroy such assets, would trigger a nuclear war just as it would if such a device against a Carrier Strike Group or an MEU.
But let's not even go there. Discussion of nuclear war is against SD Rules.
vesicles
Colonel
Calm down, buddy. This is a discussion strictly about conventional weapons. IF nuclear weapon is used, all bets are off. Logic is out the door by that time.
Also, I thought we were talking about China possibly deploying a transport sub. That means the PLA launching the offense and amphibious landing... so what's with the invasion of Shanghai??
Didn't know I gave off a non-calming vibe lol, it was just a couple sentences I scribbled together on my phone while eating dinner. Frankly I thought Jeff's talk of nuclear war a shocking escalation. I saw something like a neutron bomb being an appropriate response to a fleet of sub transporters launching an invasion from 20 miles off shore.
As for Shanghai, just a random city I picked, could be Los Angeles, or St. Petersburg. Anyway, you get the point, invade a nuclear country with an armada, expect that armada to get nuked.
vesicles
Colonel
No matter how big an armada is, it is still a conventional force. Why would you think nuke is equivalent to and compatible with any conventional forces?
Plus, detonating a nuke near your own shore line and rendering your own territory uninhabitable for the next century?
Also, any nation capable of assembling such huge armada would surely possess boat load of nukes themselves. So you want the end of human civilization?
Using nukes is the definite last resort, which means desperation. That means China would be out of options. That's a very pessimistic view of China's capabilities. You should have more faith in China's ability to protect itself. China is developing so many different highly advanced capabilities. The whole purpose of China's economic and military advancement over the past 3 decades has been to strengthen themselves and to ensure safety of its people and interests. You should have faith that, IF someone decides to invade China, China should have a full plate of conventional options, can comfortably and confidently defeat any malicious attempts, and doesn't have to resort to committing suicide and taking the entire planet with it.
I suggest it's time to stop thinking China as a helpless victim whose only option is suicide...