Diesel sub aggressor

Swedish Submarine Continues to Play Important Role in Joint Training

In a July 2004 post, Murdoc wrote:

We cannot let our enemies get ahead of us in the submarine game. The threat of Chinese or North Korean subs would keep American carrier groups farther from the action than we want in the event of a war, and much of our current overwhelming naval advantage would be squandered.

Maybe what we should do is pick up one or two good diesel boats from an ally and crew them with top-notch personnel as a red team in a sort of submarine Top Gun. Base one sub on each US coast, provide a team of trainers and advisers to work with ship and air crews, and practice like we want to play. [emphasis added]

Well, instead of picking up our own diesel boats, we’ve contracted the work out to the Swedes. In Navy News Stand:

The Swedish submarine HMS Gotland participated in a Joint Task Force Exercise (JTFEX) Dec. 6-16 with Commander, U.S. 3rd Fleet and the USS Ronald Reagan (CVN 76) Carrier Strike Group, off the coast of Southern California.

According to Swedish Liaison Officer Lt. Cmdr. Peter Ostbring, Gotland and her crew played a number of roles during the joint exercise, which mutually benefited the U.S. and Swedish navies by enhancing overall anti-submarine warfare (ASW) proficiencies and further strengthening the relationship between the two countries.

“Initially, [Gotland] was acting as an opposing force, and in the middle of the exercise, she acted as a green (friendly force) submarine, like a third country in a coalition doing intelligence and reconnaissance missions for the strike group,” he said. “Later, she returned to being an opposing force.”

Gotland’s crew has participated in several exercises like this since the one-year, bilateral training efforts between the Swedish navy and U.S. Navy began in San Diego last June.

Gotland normally acts as an opposing force during training exercises against carrier and expeditionary strike groups, naval air patrols and other forces, playing a key role in enhancing the U.S. Navy’s ASW capabilities.

Here’s a pic that should scare the living daylights out of our Navy:

The threat of this 200-foot diesel-powered sub could keep the nuclear-powered 1092-foot USS Ronald Reagan from operating where she wants or needs to at an important moment in time.

In addition to the practice our Navy is getting going up against a small diesel sub, we’ve also got a few of our personnel aboard the Gotland during the exercises.

Murdoc still thinks we could use a couple of our own diesel boats for an underwater Top Gun.


  1. Contracted. (Not Contratced). :) Anyways, i dont think the US has any AIP diesel boats, nor do they have the capability to build any.

  2. Skrip00: Oops. Fixed. Not sure why the ol’ spell-checker missed that. As for building our own non-nuclear boats, I don’t think we should. Why reinvent the wheel when so many others have damn fine wheels already? That’s why I suggested buying a couple off of an ally. I know the support and infrastructure would take some work, but I think it would be worth it in the long run. And still have these sorts of exercises to make sure we’re not falling into a rut always practicing against our own guys…

  3. What I didn’t see in this story is just how successful the Gotland was against our surface ships. Should make for some interesting reading.

  4. The Swedish diesel sub HMS Gotland? Oh yea, read somewhere it shot down 5- F/A-18’s in a joint combat excercise.

  5. Build non-nuclear subs? I believe we should really look into that prospect. 1) The non-nuke ships are a lot cheaper. 2) The air independent (fuel cell) subs are inheritly more stealthy then nuke subs. The boomers needs to stay nuclear, but the attack subs could go to air indenpendent drives and gain stealth while reducing their cost.

  6. During the wargame, the Gotland autually sunk the USS Ronald Reagan in spite of three destroyers and 4 choppers… After contact it disaapeared again and surfaced on the other side of this billon dollar investment of a ship…