Author Missing Submarine  (Read 2039 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #90 on: November 22, 2017, 09:18:36 PM »
You didn't miss much. 

http://www.history.com/shows/hunting-hitler

Looks absolutely horrid - I think I gotta try an episode.  Thanks for posting.

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #91 on: November 22, 2017, 09:19:42 PM »
Sorry, I'm immersed in "Forged in Fire: Bladesgiving."  And I thought "Swamp People: Swampsgiving" was as good as it could get.  ::)

That's great. Well, have fun at your lemon party, I guess.  ::)

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #92 on: November 22, 2017, 09:23:14 PM »
Looks absolutely horrid - I think I gotta try an episode.  Thanks for posting.
You're welcome.  Don't forget the lederhosen and Schnaps.

 


Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #93 on: November 22, 2017, 09:33:09 PM »
You're welcome.  Don't forget the lederhosen and Schnaps.

 


Legs are too ugly for Lederhosen and after that bleeding ulcer a few years back, I'm no good with harder stuff.

I am, however, about to crack open a Franziskaner Weissbier and check this shit out.  I think the good Friar can get me thru it!


Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #94 on: November 22, 2017, 09:37:27 PM »

Legs are too ugly for Lederhosen and after that bleeding ulcer a few years back, I'm no good with harder stuff.

I am, however, about to crack open a Franziskaner Weissbier and check this shit out.  I think the good Friar can get me thru it!


Ahhhh, that should work to get you into the "proper spirit" for finding the Fuhrer.  ;D

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #95 on: November 22, 2017, 09:43:36 PM »
Uruguay?  No, but the Argies and Chileans have been at each others throats for a long time, primarily over the Beagle Channel, however. The sub was coming from that area when it was lost.  Several years ago when the Brits declassified the high degree of assistance they received from Chile during the Falklands war, old wounds were reopened.

Didnít know the boat was coming from that direction.  Okay, so they need boats to defend against the Chileans.  Do you think they use the boats for intelligence gathering ops against the Chileans or to maintain some sort of barrier patrols?  Do we know that the San Juan was in any better or worse condition than their other boats?    Do we know how many boats they have?  Given the Chileans cooperation with the Brits, do Chilean ships make port calls in the Falklands for purposes of trade or  naval exercises and is it possible that the San Juan may have been in trail?

Iím not asking these questions to be argumentative.  My point is that we are dealing in speculation  and itís difficult to rule out any possibility.  As you probably know, diesel electric submarines running on battery are actually quieter than nucs and harder to pick up on passive sonar.  I can easily see the use of whatever subs they have for intelligence gathering and the Argentines being as unforthcoming as they are tells me that is probably what they were doing.   

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #96 on: November 22, 2017, 09:47:20 PM »
Ahhhh, that should work to get you into the "proper spirit" for finding the Fuhrer.  ;D

Got the old Chromecast streaming it to the TV now.   Not sure who these cats on this show are.
I don't see Harry Cooper, Peter Levenda, Gerrard Williams - the usual Hitler posse..........

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #97 on: November 22, 2017, 10:36:16 PM »
Any authentic updates of the sub since yesterday?

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #98 on: November 23, 2017, 01:51:03 AM »
Or grandson's of Kriegsmarine U-Boaters wanting to keep the family business viable.   
[/quote

Fucking This!

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #99 on: November 23, 2017, 06:12:06 AM »
Uruguay?  No, but the Argies and Chileans have been at each others throats for a long time, primarily over the Beagle Channel, however. The sub was coming from that area when it was lost.  Several years ago when the Brits declassified the high degree of assistance they received from Chile during the Falklands war, old wounds were reopened.

Tension between the two seems natural. Chile is US centric culturally and politically  and Argentina is Euro centric culturally and politically.

I've been to Chile. Beautiful country so long as you ignore the piles of garbage dumped along every mile of highway and the stray dogs everywhere.
https://goo.gl/maps/HzxFxTF96oE2

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #100 on: November 23, 2017, 09:10:12 AM »
Didnít know the boat was coming from that direction.  Okay, so they need boats to defend against the Chileans.  Do you think they use the boats for intelligence gathering ops against the Chileans or to maintain some sort of barrier patrols?  Do we know that the San Juan was in any better or worse condition than their other boats?    Do we know how many boats they have?  Given the Chileans cooperation with the Brits, do Chilean ships make port calls in the Falklands for purposes of trade or  naval exercises and is it possible that the San Juan may have been in trail?

Iím not asking these questions to be argumentative.  My point is that we are dealing in speculation  and itís difficult to rule out any possibility.  As you probably know, diesel electric submarines running on battery are actually quieter than nucs and harder to pick up on passive sonar.  I can easily see the use of whatever subs they have for intelligence gathering and the Argentines being as unforthcoming as they are tells me that is probably what they were doing.

Fair enough, but I was neither arguing or speculating.  I was just explaining reasons (military, diplomatic, and geopolitical) why I discounted my initial thoughts the sub's loss might be related to the Falklands conflict and why the Argentines would not mislead the international rescue forces as to its probable location.  Wasn't trying to convince anyone I was right.

Based on your experience, I would like you to address the intel gathering capabilities of a thirty-plus year old diesel submarine.  Are we talking about something other than what can be observed through a periscope or landing spies, such as ELINT or SIGINT platforms?


Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #102 on: November 23, 2017, 11:11:27 AM »
Fair enough, but I was neither arguing or speculating.  I was just explaining reasons (military, diplomatic, and geopolitical) why I discounted my initial thoughts the sub's loss might be related to the Falklands conflict and why the Argentines would not mislead the international rescue forces as to its probable location.  Wasn't trying to convince anyone I was right.

Based on your experience, I would like you to address the intel gathering capabilities of a thirty-plus year old diesel submarine.  Are we talking about something other than what can be observed through a periscope or landing spies, such as ELINT or SIGINT platforms?

SIGINT, ELINT you bet.  I would think that Argentina, like virtually all other countryís with submarine assetts, update their sensors and weapons systems as best they can and the St. John is not still operating with its original equipment.  Would you not agree?  I donít have access to Janeís Fighting Shipís at the moment but maybe you do.  Thatís where you will find info on the St. Johnís equipage. 
I wouldnít underestimate the capabilities of that 35 year old boat.  (How old are our B52ís, how many miles can you get out of a Mercedes

Off the top of my head I can see the boat being used to collect acoustic signatures of submarines  operated by potential enemies, monitoring the performance characteristics and operating parameters of their subs and surface craft underway and, since it is unlikely that Argentina is flying spy satellites, even old fashioned periscope photography of harbor facilities, coastal defenses, etc. 

My point with respect to the Falklands was that the boat operating in that area could not be ruled out.  It has the legs and who knows whatís on the minds of the Argentine Military. 

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #103 on: November 23, 2017, 12:34:01 PM »
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/nov/23/explosion-detected-near-site-of-missing-argentinian-submarine-navy-confirms
Quote
The explosion was picked up by US sensors and by international agencies responsible for the detection of nuclear explosions around the world, Balbi said. Two Nasa planes were continuing to fly over the area in search of the submarine.

Well, that's that. Best wishes to the families.

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #104 on: November 23, 2017, 12:54:24 PM »
Just ask Edô.

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #105 on: November 23, 2017, 01:46:59 PM »

"Hydro-acoustic anomaly"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-42092897?ocid=global_bbccom_email_23112017_top+news+stories

I was able to open the link you posted and for the first time got a look at the St Johnís track.  If that is an accurate representation, it seems to me that the ship passed unnecessarily close to the ďMelvinasĒ aka the Falklands.   Did they do that just because they can (Latino macho) or might they have had some other motive.  What are your thoughts? 


Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #106 on: November 23, 2017, 03:04:25 PM »
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/nov/23/explosion-detected-near-site-of-missing-argentinian-submarine-navy-confirms
Well, that's that. Best wishes to the families.
Right out of the script of The Hunt For Red October.
I'm telling ya . . . . ::)

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #107 on: November 23, 2017, 04:03:23 PM »
I was able to open the link you posted and for the first time got a look at the St Johnís track.  If that is an accurate representation, it seems to me that the ship passed unnecessarily close to the ďMelvinasĒ aka the Falklands.   Did they do that just because they can (Latino macho) or might they have had some other motive.  What are your thoughts?

Now you are asking me to speculate, tough to do since I have no practical experience in submarine operations and/or mission planning.  That said, it would make sense the route taken back to home base was chosen to maximize training opportunities in various scenarios.... perhaps navigation exercises, varying sea depths, time to complete operational training requirements to stay within mission readiness parameters, etc.  Also, could have been selected to allow enough sea room for anti-submarine training of Argentine surface vessels, aircraft, and other subs against the San Juan. Not sure how close they came to Falklands/British territorial waters, but I doubt they violated them.  As long as they stayed in international waters, no harm, no foul as I understand  it. May have thumbed their noses at the Brits in transit.  Would they have been able to gather useful intelligence from outside those waters?  Given a certain set of assumptions about the disposition of British forces, I'm sure you could give us an educated analysis of what they might have been able to collect.

Whatever the motive for the route taken, for the reasons previously stated I still don't believe the sub loss was related to the Falklands conflict or that the Argentines lied to the international search and rescue forces as to its location. 

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #108 on: November 23, 2017, 05:19:29 PM »
Now you are asking me to speculate, tough to do since I have no practical experience in submarine operations and/or mission planning.  That said, it would make sense the route taken back to home base was chosen to maximize training opportunities in various scenarios.... perhaps navigation exercises, varying sea depths, time to complete operational training requirements to stay within mission readiness parameters, etc.  Also, could have been selected to allow enough sea room for anti-submarine training of Argentine surface vessels, aircraft, and other subs against the San Juan. Not sure how close they came to Falklands/British territorial waters, but I doubt they violated them.  As long as they stayed in international waters, no harm, no foul as I understand  it. May have thumbed their noses at the Brits in transit.  Would they have been able to gather useful intelligence from outside those waters?  Given a certain set of assumptions about the disposition of British forces, I'm sure you could give us an educated analysis of what they might have been able to collect.

Whatever the motive for the route taken, for the reasons previously stated I still don't believe the sub loss was related to the Falklands conflict or that the Argentines lied to the international search and rescue forces as to its location.

Iíve been out of the loop up until now. I hadnít heard that they might have been operating with surface craft.  If you lay a direct track from the shipís point of origin to its destination you can see that it would take it a good bit west of the Falklands. 

Hereís what I think.  There is a long standing antagonism towards the Brits on the part of the Argentinians over the Malvinas and more than just a little paranoia.  As you know, many nations, including the U.S. routinely probe and conduct covert intelligence gathering ops against traditional or potential foes.  Itís not at all far fetched to believe that the Argentinians take advantage of every opportunity to do so including transits and training ops.  In fact, such operations are sometimes undertaken to provide cover.  Iím not necessarily talking about missions involving incursiůn into territorial waters, although that may occur as the opportunitity presents itself, but to probe and  nose around using whatever data gathering or observational capabilities they possess.  Make sense? 

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #109 on: November 23, 2017, 08:55:04 PM »
I found some additional information on the San Juan and the Argentine Sumarine Force.

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/everything-you-need-know-about-argentinas-submarine-force-23290

https://warisboring.com/what-happened-to-argentinas-missing-submarine/


Also from Wikipedia article on the Argentine Navy:

The Argentine Navy participates in joint exercises with other friendly navies like Brazil, United States, Spain, France, Canada, South Africa,[29] Italy, Uruguay, and since the 1990s, Chile. They are also routinely held in order to develop a common operational doctrine. Every year in conjunction with the Chilean Navy, the Argentine Navy participate in the Patrulla AntŠrtica Naval Combinada (English: Joint Antarctic Naval Patrol) to guarantee safety to all touristic and scientific ships that are in transit within the Antarctic Peninsula where the Navy is also directly responsible of maintaining the Argentine bases there.


Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #110 on: November 23, 2017, 09:31:52 PM »

Iíve been out of the loop up until now. I hadnít heard that they might have been operating with surface craft.  If you lay a direct track from the shipís point of origin to its destination you can see that it would take it a good bit west of the Falklands vice skirting its territorial waters as depicted.

Hereís what I think.  There is a long standing antagonism towards the Brits on the part of the Argentinians over the Malvinas and more than just a little paranoia.  As you know, many nations, including the U.S. routinely probe and conduct covert intelligence gathering ops against traditional or potential foes.  Itís not at all far fetched to believe that the Argentinians take advantage of every opportunity to do so including transits and training ops.  In fact, such operations are sometimes undertaken to provide cover.  Iím not necessarily talking about missions involving incursiůn into territorial waters, although that may occur as the opportunitity presents itself, but to probe and  nose around using whatever data gathering or observational capabilities they possess.  Make sense?

CORRECTED COPY

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #111 on: November 23, 2017, 11:16:51 PM »
CORRECTED COPY

Any nation, given an opportunity, would collect intel data that could be obtained in the course of conducting normal, peace time operations given the capability to do so.  Sure, the Argentines would get whatever was readily available, but that's different than conducting a covert intel gathering mission and losing a boat in the process. 

Personally, I'm now more curious about the time line of events in the loss of this sub.  It was assumed missing last Wednesday, but it took the CBCTO until today to tell the Argies they detected an underwater explosion last Thursday?  Similarly, the USN told the Argies just yesterday they detected a "hydro-acoustic anomaly" last Thursday as well. I understand the US possibly not wanting to reveal sources/capabilities, but why would this international anti-nuclear organization withhold its information?  That time line make sense to you?

The Argentines did deploy their subs during the Falklands War btw, but with less than sterling results.  They got zero hits on British ships, and lost one of their boats (Santa Fe) at South Georgia. In fact I think San Juan was obtained to replace Santa Fe.

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #112 on: November 24, 2017, 01:26:35 AM »
Tension between the two seems natural. Chile is US centric culturally and politically  and Argentina is Euro centric culturally and politically.

I've been to Chile. Beautiful country so long as you ignore the piles of garbage dumped along every mile of highway and the stray dogs everywhere.
https://goo.gl/maps/HzxFxTF96oE2

Those aren't stray dogs.   That's the nations protein reserve, on the hoof, er, paw, if you will.

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #113 on: November 24, 2017, 06:09:45 AM »




At least the crew knew what they were in for. Aloha.

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #114 on: November 24, 2017, 09:24:06 AM »
Apparently Argentina and Chile have not been ďat each otherís throatĒ for a while.


From Wikipedia:

ArgentinaĖChile relations refers to international relations between the Republic of Chile and the Argentine Republic. Argentina and Chile share the world's third-longest international border, which is 5,300 km (3,300 mi) long and runs from north to the south along the Andes mountains. Although gaining their independence during the South American wars of liberation, during much of the 19th and the 20th century relations between the countries were chilled as a result of disputes over the border in Patagonia. In recent years relations have improved dramatically. Despite increased trade between the two countries, Argentina and Chile have followed quite different economic policies. Chile has signed free trade agreements with countries such as China, the USA, Canada, South Korea and the EU and is an active member of the APEC, while Argentina belongs to the Mercosur regional free trade area. Both countries are members of the Union of South American Nations.Ē

Also note that their navies have been conducting joint ops since the late 90s.

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #115 on: November 24, 2017, 10:53:04 AM »
Yup.  There has definitely been a thaw in relations.


Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #116 on: November 24, 2017, 11:13:15 AM »
Any nation, given an opportunity, would collect intel data that could be obtained in the course of conducting normal, peace time operations given the capability to do so.  Sure, the Argentines would get whatever was readily available, but that's different than conducting a covert intel gathering mission and losing a boat in the process. 

Personally, I'm now more curious about the time line of events in the loss of this sub.  It was assumed missing last Wednesday, but it took the CBCTO until today to tell the Argies they detected an underwater explosion last Thursday?  Similarly, the USN told the Argies just yesterday they detected a "hydro-acoustic anomaly" last Thursday as well. I understand the US possibly not wanting to reveal sources/capabilities, but why would this international anti-nuclear organization withhold its information?  That time line make sense to you?

The Argentines did deploy their subs during the Falklands War btw, but with less than sterling results.  They got zero hits on British ships, and lost one of their boats (Santa Fe) at South Georgia. In fact I think San Juan was obtained to replace Santa Fe.

The following is offered for your consideration. 

Wikipedia:

Since the mid-2000s, diplomatic relations between the UK and Argentina have become increasingly strained. In 2006, Argentina renewed claims to the Falkland Islands, citing concern over fishing and petroleum rights.[26] On 28 March 2009, UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown stated that there was "nothing to discuss" with Cristina Kirchner, the Argentine president, over sovereignty of the islands, when they met in Chile on his pre-2009 G-20 London Summit world tour.[27] On 22 April 2009 Argentina made a formal claim to the UN to an area of the continental shelf encompassing the Falklands, South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands, and parts of Antarctica, citing 11 years worth of maritime survey data.[28] The UK quickly protested these claims.[29]

Since 2010, reports of British oil exploration around the Falkland Islands have caused a further downturn in UK-Argentine relations.[30] In February 2010 the Argentine government announced that ships travelling to the Falklands (as well as South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands) would require a permit to use Argentine territorial waters. Despite the new restrictions, Desire Petroleum began drilling for oil on 22 February 2010, about 54 nautical miles (100 km, 62 mi) north of the Islands.[31]

I would respectfully submit that Argentina has every reason to use submarines for IG ops against the U.K. and to want to cover it up.  Notice where the Brits are drilling in relation to the San Juanís track.   


Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #117 on: November 24, 2017, 12:05:41 PM »
In the world of geopolitics, the ebb and flow of relations, even between avowed enemies, is common.  Similarly, joint operations and/or cooperation under certain situations (anti-drug, anti-piracy, disaster relief, search and rescue etc.)  between such nations is not uncommon.  The US has conducted joint exercises with the Russians and Chinese in the last few years.  I specifically remember a substantial joint naval exercise between the US and the Chinese just a year or so ago.   At the height of the Cold War, the US conducted a joint space mission (Apollo - Soyuz) with the Soviets, and provided direct weapon system upgrade support (Peace Pearl) to the the PRC. Despite cooperation in these scenarios, no one had any doubt the nations involved still considered one another adversaries.  An added bonus to such operations is an opportunity to observe a potential enemy up close, a real intel gathering opportunity.

The Argentines will never give up their claim to the Falklands, it's a national honor thing. No politician proposing to give up that claim could expect to stay in office.  It also allows Argentine leadership to trot out the Malvinas as needed to divert public attention from domestic issues.  No surprise a nation in such financial straits as Argentina wanting a piece of the oil pie in the vicinity, either. These points notwithstanding, the Argies have not made any military moves to retake the Falklands since they failed 35 years ago.  They are no threat to do so in the immediate future due to the sad state of their military forces and their inability to project power.  Clearly they don't have to worry about the Brits attacking them. 

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #118 on: November 24, 2017, 01:52:00 PM »
In the world of geopolitics, the ebb and flow of relations, even between avowed enemies, is common.  Similarly, joint operations and/or cooperation under certain situations (anti-drug, anti-piracy, disaster relief, search and rescue etc.)  between such nations is not uncommon.  The US has conducted joint exercises with the Russians and Chinese in the last few years.  I specifically remember a substantial joint naval exercise between the US and the Chinese just a year or so ago.   At the height of the Cold War, the US conducted a joint space mission (Apollo - Soyuz) with the Soviets, and provided direct weapon system upgrade support (Peace Pearl) to the the PRC. Despite cooperation in these scenarios, no one had any doubt the nations involved still considered one another adversaries.  An added bonus to such operations is an opportunity to observe a potential enemy up close, a real intel gathering opportunity.

The Argentines will never give up their claim to the Falklands, it's a national honor thing. No politician proposing to give up that claim could expect to stay in office.  It also allows Argentine leadership to trot out the Malvinas as needed to divert public attention from domestic issues.  No surprise a nation in such financial straits as Argentina wanting a piece of the oil pie in the vicinity, either. These points notwithstanding, the Argies have not made any military moves to retake the Falklands since they failed 35 years ago.  They are no threat to do so in the immediate future due to the sad state of their military forces and their inability to project power.  Clearly they don't have to worry about the Brits attacking them.

No but the Brits would certainly be protective of their commercial interests which is the point Iím trying to make here.  I will preface what follows by saying that there are no confirmed facts at this time supporting the possible scenario that I describe.  On the other hand it cannot be dismissed out of hand.

A primary mission of Navies world wide is to protect their nationís commercial interests (re Alfred T. Mahon) and assetts, submarines included, are deployed to do just that.  It is entirely possible, if not likely, that the Brits have submarine(s) on patrol in the area of the Falklands to protect what is certainly a huge investment of capital in oil exploration and production in contested waters. 

As you probably know submarines of the U.S. and Russia had a number of close encounters during the Cold War which sometimes resulted in collisions that were not made known to the public at the time. (I have heard such operations in which opposing forces attempt to block the others progress  or muscle it into changing course as Ēbump and run.Ē

I think it well within the realm of possibility that such and occurrence may have happened.  The San Juan would not fare well in a collision with a much larger Brit SSN.  Also, if the San Juan were to have made the mistake of opening a torpedo tube breech door after having closed to within torpedo range of the SSN (or done anything that could have been interpreted/misinterpreted as a hostile act) it would be incumbent on the CO of the SSN to take it out.

Again, there is nothing more than the track of the San Juan which appears to intersect the area in which the Brits have a huge interest and the fact the Argentines were so quick to dismiss reports of ďa non-nuclear explosionĒ to suggest that this may have happened but I think that you have been too quick to rule out the possibility.

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #119 on: November 24, 2017, 04:25:25 PM »
Maybe they defected to Bolivia.

to N. Korea...