The Gotland class submarines of the Swedish Navy are one of the world's most modern conventional submarines. They are the first submarines in the world to feature a Stirling air-independent propulsion system (AIP), which extends their endurance from a few days to several weeks. This capability has previously only been available with nuclear powered submarines. The system is also said to be vibration-free, silent and virtualy undetectable. Sweden's submarines are considered an important defense asset. The submarine force's area of operation has recently been expanded from its original task of countering the threat of Soviet invasion in the Baltic Sea region. Sweden's submarines have begun to participate in multinational rapid reaction exercises acting in waters that range from the North Sea, the Atlantic, and the Bay of Biscay to the Mediterranean with new tasks focusing on reconnaissance, intelligence gathering, and surveillance.[1] The Viking next-generation submarines were designed to enhance these capabilities, as they featured increased endurance and interoperability with other naval branches.[4] However, with the withdrawal of Denmark and Norway from the Viking program, it is not clear that Sweden will be able to find new partners for the program, or fund the design, construction, and operation of these new boats on its own. In May 2005, the Gotland was leased to the U.S. Navy for one year, complete with a Swedish crew. The Gotland will initially be based in San Diego, where the U.S. Navy will practice joint maneuvers with the stealthy AIP-equipped diesel submarine.[5] According to the Swedish newspaper Blekinge Läns Tidning, U.S. interest in the Gotland class was aroused during joint naval exercises when the U.S. Navy was unable to track the Swedish submarine.[6] During its first year in the United States, the Gotland is scheduled to conduct up to 160 training days at sea, supporting strike groups, individual ships and rescue submarines, as well as participate in testing and development of new equipment.[7] The Gotland regularly uses its diesel engines only when entering or exiting port, going on two-week-plus "silent" patrols using its Stirling AIP engines exclusively.[8] As of March 2006, the U.S. Navy was reportedly in talks with Sweden on extending the lease for one to two more years.[8,10] Reportedly, during a Joint Task Force Exercise on December 6-16, 2005, with the USS Ronald Reagan Carrier Strike Group off the coast of Southern California, the Gotland managed to take several pictures of the Ronald Reagan from close quarters, indicating a "strike" on the aircraft carrier.[9] As Gotland's Lieutenant Commander Jan Westas says, the U.S. ASW forces "have had a very difficult time finding us."[8] To date, the exercises have been carried out in deep water. It is expected that exercises with the Gotland in coastal waters will prove even more challenging to U.S. ASW.[8] http://www.nti.org/db/submarines/sweden/index.html
This technology has been around for decades. I've flown against a Japanese version of this (can't remember if it was a Sterling or not). We could find our LA hunter-killer that was waiting for it easier than we could find the Japanese sub.
USS Ronald Reagan 'sunk' by HMS Gotland http://www.nbc4.tv/news/10116514/detail.html Following is a verbatim script from the on-air report. HENRY: According to Swedish newspapers, in training exercises the Gotland has sunk our most sophisticated nuclear submarines. But perhaps even more disconcerting, it reportedly sunk our largest aircraft carrier, the U.S.S. Reagan.
"...HENRY: Although this emerging undersea threat is a top priority for the U.S. Navy, the U.S. is committed to its nuclear submarine force, and has no plans to develop subs like the Gotland." and if they did, why would they say so?
The HMS Gotland is like every other high tech weapon, it will be on the forefront for a few years, then it'll be the norm when countermeasures are discovered. Case in point: F-117 shot down over Serbia. The F-117 is a great weapon system, but it to is vulnerable. Nothing beats proper Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures for the situation and evolving them when things change.
It's not the first time the Ronald Reagan has been sunk. These war games are too scripted to be of any investigative substance. That's my opinion anyway. I wasn't a part of this... just seems that we who are not "in the know" tend to think that we're supposed to "win" our own war games when playing with foreign powers. What ever happened to letting the other guy show his cards?
This tends to be true...we used to (USS Pennsylvania) get sunk by P-3's all the time...after we started banging on the hull with blunt metal objects. Nothing personal to anyone in P-3's but...P-3 vs. Trident isn't a contest. From a technical point of view...the news guy...Henry has no idea what he is talking about/looking at. This is not to discount the technology...AIP is very, very neat stuff. Oh yeah....BTW...... http://www.airwarriors.com/forum/showthread.php?t=132741 Merge these mods?
yes it was called battery. Old submarines used batterys to go under water and take cover. but the teknik that swedens subs make is only 3 diffrent types one that sweden makes, Germans make one typ dont know how good that one is or how it works and the russens are try to make one. Japan have brout swedens tekniks to make the system if I dont remeber wrong. as Australia. But the system to make the subs silent is not only how it engens works it is all. how fast the propeler moves, how the propeller is made mm Look at thise that made from us media. http://www.nbc4.tv/video/10117407/detail.html#
While true, the Sterling engine has, indeed, been around for several decades. And I stand by my statement that fighting an AIP sub is a lot harder, sometimes even harder than fighting a battery/desiel sub.
In places like Norway, Sweden and Switzerland the guys are in the reserves for 20-25 years after their active service. They often keep their rifles and uniforms in their closets during that time......just in case. Once they are done they would almost certainly have to turn back in their rifles. They are not swimming in money when it comes in to defense spending in those countries and letting the guys keep their rifles would be pretty expensive.
Puts a different spin on a "well-regulated militia," huh? I can't imagine everyone in the US being trained in a militia and being issued an M-16...
In Switzerland (dunno about the other countries), after your military obligation is up, the rifle is yours until you die. They even go as far as to mandate that all able-bodied men of "fighting age" MUST own a firearm. (My wife lived in Switzerland for a while, which is how I know this.) Side note, I wonder what American hippie-liberals would say about that...
I would feel better if every American was trained thoroughly on how to use their guns, like the Swiss, which is not the case here.......
Well, I've heard one interpretation of the Second Ammendment that said that the original intent meant "a well-regulated militia" to be just what you see in countries like Swizerland. Everyone would have to have weapons, and have to be trained in their use.
What I know is only switzerland have wepens home. The homeGards can have wepens home but mostly not. here is some liks to some swedish tecs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saab_Gripen the JAS 39 gripen http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:HMS_Visby_1.JPG HMS Visby worlds first Stalth ship that is in operating status. http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/gotland/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Gotland_(Gtd) http://www.nbc4.tv/video/10117407/detail.html# Last one is a video from NBC about the sub
