tampering with our undersea cables is increasingly becoming an issue. What kind of assets would we need to try and prevent that? ASW for sure, but most likely subs?
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Undersea cables
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Graylion View Posttampering with our undersea cables is increasingly becoming an issue. What kind of assets would we need to try and prevent that? ASW for sure, but most likely subs?For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.
- Likes 2
-
Originally posted by Graylion View Posttampering with our undersea cables is increasingly becoming an issue. What kind of assets would we need to try and prevent that? ASW for sure, but most likely subs?
question is what do you do? Report to UN drop something along the lines of diver scaring charges?
Comment
-
Originally posted by na grohmiti View PostIf you encounter a vessel submerged within the EEZ, there isn't much you an do about it, other than make it clear you know he's there.
Then write a strongly worded letter to the UNSC.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by Graylion View Posttampering with our undersea cables is increasingly becoming an issue. What kind of assets would we need to try and prevent that? ASW for sure, but most likely subs?
The reality is that NATO (mainly France, UK and the US) does that trans-Atlantic SLOC security job for you. If you are concerned join NATO.
If you seek ASW capabilities NATO will want to know what your intended end use is. It will not want a country going rouge and interfering in legitimate security operations such underwater SLOC security and demand coordination.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Anzac View Post
How many Trans-Atlantic underwater cables does Ireland actually 100% own by itself?
The reality is that NATO (mainly France, UK and the US) does that trans-Atlantic SLOC security job for you. If you are concerned join NATO.
If you seek ASW capabilities NATO will want to know what your intended end use is. It will not want a country going rouge and interfering in legitimate security operations such underwater SLOC security and demand coordination.
we are also the largest data centre hub in Europe
we already know that a NATO country has previously tapped at least one of them, we know that Russians have recced them on the landward side
Most submarine cables are privately not state owned and our economy depends on them
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by DeV View Post
There are 17 comms submarine cables plus 1 for power connecting Ireland to elsewhere.
we are also the largest data centre hub in Europe
we already know that a NATO country has previously tapped at least one of them, we know that Russians have recced them on the landward side
Most submarine cables are privately not state owned and our economy depends on them
Well known that Ireland is the largest host nation to principally US owned Data centres and economically does very well in having them there. That a FVEY's nation to be specific has tapped Trans Atlantic cables is not unsurprising and would have no direct security bearing on Ireland but indirect benefits. The fact that Russians have recce'd them within the 12 mile limit is more concerning as it is a breach of territorial sovereignty.
This leads to the question. What ASW capabilities does Ireland require? To answer that first one needs to distinguish where does it wish to operate. Is it to guard against underwater incursions into the territorial sea or is it to start partnering inside the tent with other nations NATO/FVEY's to protect SLOC's including undersea cables in international waters?
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Anzac View Post
It was a rhetorical question DeV about cable ownership.
Well known that Ireland is the largest host nation to principally US owned Data centres and economically does very well in having them there. That a FVEY's nation to be specific has tapped Trans Atlantic cables is not unsurprising and would have no direct security bearing on Ireland but indirect benefits. The fact that Russians have recce'd them within the 12 mile limit is more concerning as it is a breach of territorial sovereignty.
This leads to the question. What ASW capabilities does Ireland require? To answer that first one needs to distinguish where does it wish to operate. Is it to guard against underwater incursions into the territorial sea or is it to start partnering inside the tent with other nations NATO/FVEY's to protect SLOC's including undersea cables in international waters?Last edited by ancientmariner; 23 October 2021, 13:50.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by Anzac View Post
It was a rhetorical question DeV about cable ownership.
Well known that Ireland is the largest host nation to principally US owned Data centres and economically does very well in having them there. That a FVEY's nation to be specific has tapped Trans Atlantic cables is not unsurprising and would have no direct security bearing on Ireland but indirect benefits. The fact that Russians have recce'd them within the 12 mile limit is more concerning as it is a breach of territorial sovereignty.
This leads to the question. What ASW capabilities does Ireland require? To answer that first one needs to distinguish where does it wish to operate. Is it to guard against underwater incursions into the territorial sea or is it to start partnering inside the tent with other nations NATO/FVEY's to protect SLOC's including undersea cables in international waters?
as I understand it we have a sovereign claim over the Continental Shelf which extends beyond our 200 mile EEZ (in some areas)
if we lay a claim we have a responsibility to that territory (as we do to the land a data centre is built on)
It wasn’t just transatlantic cables that a FVEYs nation had tapped it was a cross channel (assuming being at that country’s landfall). Potentially doing damage to Irish Government interests (which may not necessarily be the same as those reading it, eg Dept of Foreign Affairs comms traffic to Irish agencies or in deed Irish business interests) (having said that there is much easier ways to do it).
We are neither in NATO or FVEY (nor have aspirations to be). We we lay claim at the very least we should retain the capability to at least monitor what is happening on our territory (in this case the territorial seas or seabed within our claims).
that doesn’t necessarily mean a fleet of ASW frigates (with HMS & TAS sonars, ASW torpedo, helicopters with dipping sonars etc) or MARPAT with MAD booms or SOSUS system.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by DeV View Post
we may not own the cables but we own the seabed and therefore we have sovereignty.
as I understand it we have a sovereign claim over the Continental Shelf which extends beyond our 200 mile EEZ (in some areas)
https://www.marine.ie/Home/site-area...al-map-ireland
if we lay a claim we have a responsibility to that territory (as we do to the land a data centre is built on)
It wasn’t just transatlantic cables that a FVEYs nation had tapped it was a cross channel (assuming being at that country’s landfall). Potentially doing damage to Irish Government interests (which may not necessarily be the same as those reading it, eg Dept of Foreign Affairs comms traffic to Irish agencies or in deed Irish business interests) (having said that there is much easier ways to do it).
We are neither in NATO or FVEY (nor have aspirations to be). We we lay claim at the very least we should retain the capability to at least monitor what is happening on our territory (in this case the territorial seas or seabed within our claims).
that doesn’t necessarily mean a fleet of ASW frigates (with HMS & TAS sonars, ASW torpedo, helicopters with dipping sonars etc) or MARPAT with MAD booms or SOSUS system.Last edited by ancientmariner; 23 October 2021, 14:44.
- Likes 3
Comment
-
Perennially the difficulty in ASW was , as you close the target the return echo was seen and heard by operators more quickly until you got what was called "instant echo". In those few moments the submarine had a chance of escape. Walker RN introduced a system of ships in consort linked by radio whereby one would hold the echo and others would run in on the position and launch DCs with a more certain result. The Limbo mortars allowed a ship keep a target in track at a distance and launch from about 300 yards. This system held good up to the 1990's.
Comment
Comment