This cannot be done. I don’t know why you think it could. Russia and China would sink every single one and never admit to it. We’d have no fleet. Why would nuclear sub engineers think “we need the internet to make this work.” Submarines have worked well for 60 years. They don’t need the internet. And, even if they did use the internet…at all…on a submarine...the internet goes out from time to time, they would have alternate navigation functions.
Most geopolitical literature out there on the subject. No country is really a threat to us conventionally. Russia and China don’t spend enough money on military equipment to arm their armies the way we do (It’s not even close). All of their arms research money, in Russia, went for EMP/scalar weapons, and China to tech and nuclear.
Real threats come from China or Russia shooting down a few dozen U.S. satellites all at once and launching a few EMPs over the East and West seaborne. But I doubt they would be able to do that without the U.S. preventing it or even retaliating before the initial impacts are fully borne. What do you think we have our space weapons for?
The Art of War is that of deception.
Don’t be fooled into thinking that the Pentagon is that stupid. Our elites will die before they are outsmarted by the Russians. We have analyzed every possible long term geopolitical move they could make for 70 years. The Chinese may be more tricky. This is why we are trying to turn China and Russias foreign assets against each other.
Iran is a good one. It is unlikely that the Chinese and Russians would go to war twith NATO and the U.S if one thought they would end up subordinate to the other in a new hegemony. So they will be at each other’s throats for Iran and Kazahkstan. The Trilateral Commision and RAND have looked at how to massage these things for a long time. Our CIA, while not incredibly effective, can throw massive amounts of money to certain causes through the ESF/FED RES SYS.
Also, food for thought: “You keep your friends close and your enemies closer.” Now, think of England and Israel.
There’s very little in the way of EM communication with submarines once they go deep. A submarine can reel out a roughly mile-long antenna for limited extremely-low frequency (ELF) communication but they do this only rarely because the whole point of having a submarine is to be undetectable.
Our submarines are one of the few good parts of our navy. Russia and China have both invested heavily in submarines because they are cost-effective: extremely expensive to destroy (you pretty much have to build your own submarine), not a whole lot more expensive to build and operate than an ordinary ship and well capable of sinking anything that comes within range.
I already admitted that it would really difficult sink a submarine. But you certainly don’t need the Internet to so. Look up “social engineering”. You could convince someone on the inside to do for you. Also, it’s not as if the entire military is made up of submarines.
Okay. I just thought of another way that involves hacking (and making assumptions on protocol–but yeah, this is hacking). Say the communications system is hacked into, then a change of route is sent to the submarine. The submarine then swims into an ambush.
If you’re representative of how sure the military is of its infallibilty, then the more susceptible I think the military is to being hacked.
The problem is that without communicating to the outside world or otherwise exposing itself, a sub underwater can only navigate with gyroscopic dead reckoning, inertial computing, and bottom-contour depth navigation using a fathometer.
That’s fine for nuclear-missile submarines (if they exist), but it doesn’t do much good for attack subs which actually need to know where the enemy is in the water, and that they genuinely are the enemy. They either have to use sonar (which announces their position to all and sundry), or they have to surface, or they have to communicate with the outside world somehow.
How do attack subs escorting a surface fleet know friend from foe if they aren’t in contact with the fleet’s IFF system? How do they avoid being targetted by their own ships and aircraft, who use sonar with impunity, if they don’t use IFF transponders themselves?
There’s an excruciatingly detailed, recently declassified US Navy report entirely on the subject, essentially backing what our save-the-whales friend claims there.
“Minimal operational effectiveness” in 10ft waves does not inspire confidence.
On this basis, I’m fairly sure there are pretty simple passive sonar counter-measures, which basically involve blasting the ocean with sound across all frequencies.
Furthermore, passive sonar cannot detect utterly silent mines - a very old area denial weapon. When Iran says its going to block the Straits of Hormuz, I think they may have mines in mind.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the effective use of passive sonar is precluded by Murphy’s Laws of Combat (Tactics), sections 4 and 6.
Also, about the code breaking and sending false signals to our submarines … all of that is always a possibility. Have you seen Dr. Strangelove? You know about the phone lines that the Secret Service, Air Force, and White House use, right? They change that code several times a day. It is not “infallibility” that I am promoting. I’m saying “contingencies”, bunches of them. Continuity of Government is the final and ultimate priority of the military. They won’t just collapse due to clever computer nerds in China or Russia.
Ron Paul says it all the time, the threats do not come from foreign militaries, they come from our stultish bankers.