Subs

File: 14-pick-up-artist-protest-1.w1024.jpg (266KB, 1024x682px) Image search: [Google]

266KB, 1024x682px

>>31017420
>So who has the better submarines? US or Russia?

At this very moment, the US generally has nearly all advantages in terms of numbers, equipment quality, personnel training, and practical reach in a potential conflict.

Of course, different variations -- like the region, or scale of conflict -- could lessen these advantages. Submarines are useful tools, but they are not all the tools necessary to win on water.

>And who has the advantage incase of nuclear war?

This question is so vague it doesn't really matter what the answer is.

This is low quality bait, OP. Reassess and come back with some better work.

>And who has the advantage incase of nuclear war

Russia is 3 submarines deep into its new SSBN class.
US is zero submarines deep into its Ohio replacement, they're just in the discussion to fund it.

Does this answer your question?

>>31017745
Well, I'm convinced. Where do I send my checks to?

>>31017745
Too bad the US still has all 14 of the original Ohio class SSBNs which are probably more or less on par with the 3 Boreis that Russia has completed. Also too bad that more than half of the 3D portion of ORP has already been designed. But please, tell me more about how Russia has the advantage.

>>31018671
I wouldn't be so sure. Russian subs are quite deadly as the records show. And their crews have to be the bravest in the world to serve in the modern Russian navy.

>>31018714
kek

>>31017420
Since 2000 (going by commission date) Russia has built 3 Borei SSBNs, 1 Akula SSN, 1 Yasen SSN, 4 Kilo SSKs, and 1 Lada SSK. Also the Sarov which is a test platform.

Since 2000 the US has built 12 Virginia SSNs, 1 Seawolf, and converted 4 Ohios to SSGNs.

So going by pure numbers you're looking at 13 subs built in the US vs 10 or 11 built in Russia (depending on whether or not you count the Sarov).

But 5 of the Russian subs are diesels, 4 of which are just upgraded Kilos. They only have 1 recently built SSN.

>>31018714
>deadly
If you mean to their own men, sure.

>>31017478
Why are unfuckable people protesting the word "fucksock?" It clearly doesn't apply to them.

>>31018714
> Russian subs are quite deadly

You are correct. Russian subs are extremely deadly to their own crews.

>>31017745
No, because it's irrelevant and retardedly ignorant.