为了满足全球承担义务的需求,美国海军需要更多的攻击型潜艇。全球范围内,服役的潜艇只能提供五角大楼的区域战斗指挥官需求潜艇数量的不到三分之二。美国网友: 美国的潜艇事故已经多的看不完了,没空去关心别家的事故,童鞋。
-------------译者:clibra-审核者:龙腾翻译总管------------
The United States Navy needs more attack submarines to meet its global commitments. Worldwide, the service is only able to provide the Pentagon’s regional combatant commanders with less than two-thirds the number ofsubmarines that they need.
为了满足全球承担义务的需求,美国海军需要更多的攻击型潜艇。全球范围内,服役的潜艇只能提供五角大楼的区域战斗指挥官需求潜艇数量的不到三分之二。
“The threats in the undersea environment continue to go up,” Vice Adm. Joseph Mulloy, the service’s deputy chief of naval operations for integration of capabilities and resources told the House Armed Services Committee’s seapower and projection forces subcommittee on February 25.
“来自海面下环境的威胁不断上升”,海军中将、海军作战能力和资源综合处副处长Joseph Mulloy在2月25日对众议院军事委员会的海上力量和力量投掷附属委员会说。
The U.S. Navy—which has roughly 52 attack submarines—is on track to have 41 attack boats by 2029. The Chinese, meanwhile would have “at least 70, and they’re building,” Mulloy said. “You get back into the whole quality versus quantity issue, but at the same time the Russians are also building. . . and they build much higher-end submarines.”
美国海军现今大约拥有52艘攻击性潜艇,到2029年预计将拥有41艘攻击型潜艇。 “中国到那时将拥有至少70艘,他们正在不停的造”Mulloy说,“你又要扯总数量和质量的蛋,但与此同时俄国人也在造,他们造的潜艇要高端很多。”(译者按:米帝的潜艇全部是近万吨的核潜艇,中国的大部分是2、3千吨的常规型小潜艇。米帝军队哭穷是常态,目的是吓唬国会拨钱,但未来看这招会越来越不灵,因为米帝老玩QE也会精尽人亡的,政府也会破产的。)
-------------译者:clibra-审核者:龙腾翻译总管------------
A Chinese leroy • 2 days ago
Are US submarines any good? Who knows, none of them has gone thru combat and none of the US submarine crews have any real combat experience other than war game practices; all people can go by about the US submarines' capability is a Hollywood movie. One only can conclude that potency of US submarines is Hollywood style make-believe grade..
美国潜艇很牛吗? 它们从来没经历过战斗,美国的潜艇艇员除了演习也从来没有真正的战斗经验。所有人们能了解到的美国潜艇的能力就是好莱坞电影。人们只能得到的结论是美国潜艇的潜在能力是好莱坞风格的牛逼级别。
Joe Lynch A Chinese • 2 days ago
As a U.S. submariner I can tell you...YES...our subs are good. Great in fact. Further, I can tell you Chinese submarines are very poor, as with their entire Navy. We are tracking Chinese boats before they even leave the pier...and I mean that literally! China has a long looooong way to go to become competitive. There are a half-dozen countries around the world with better Navies than China. And, it's funny you mention "real combat experience". What "experience" has China EVER had with submarine combat??? You seem to forget, the U.S. has been doing this 'submarine thing' for a long time. China is still taking baby steps with its Navy. We would mop the floor with you! Sorry, but sometimes the truth hurts.
作为一个美国潜艇兵我可以告诉你,是的,我们的潜艇很牛逼。事实上是超牛逼。另外,我还能告诉你中国的潜艇超烂,他们的整个海军也同样如此。我们能在中国潜艇还没离港时就跟踪到它们(译者按:讽刺中国潜艇噪声大),我一点也没夸张! 中国离牛逼的水平还有很远的路要走。世界上有半打的国家海军比中国的要好。并且,说到“真实作战经验”你简直太搞笑了。中国有任~何~的~潜艇战斗“经验”吗?看起来你忘了,美国玩潜艇已经好多年。中国的海军还处于蹒跚学步阶段。我们能横扫你们。不好意思,但有时候事实就是这么伤人。
-------------译者:clibra-审核者:龙腾翻译总管------------
TDog Joe Lynch • 2 days ago
I'm curious about that claim because the USS Kitty Hawk certainly got a wake up call back in 2006.
关于那些大话(指上文吹米帝海军如何如何牛逼)我很好奇,因为2006年,美国的小鹰号航母确实被(中国潜艇)打过叫醒电话。(译者按:指06年中国宋级潜艇穿透小鹰号航母防御圈逼近航母身边5海里,而航母直到中国潜艇上浮后才从梦中醒来)。
Mind you, I don't disagree with your assertion that the US Navy fields the best and most effective submarine force in the world, but when folks say that Chinese subs are being tracked before they leave their berths I find that smacks more of barracks talk than fact, especially given the 2006 encounter.
提醒你一下,我并不反对你的“美国海军最牛逼,潜艇在世界上最牛”的声明,但当人们说中国潜艇还没从泊位上离开就被跟踪,我觉得这些话更有兵营调侃的味道,而不是事实,特别是在发生了2006年遭遇的情况下。
Just because you're good (and trust me, I have nothing but the utmost admiration for the capabilities of the US submarine force) does not mean the other guy is a rank amateur. Complacency and braggadocio are not the best items to be adding to one's training regimen.
仅仅是因为你很厉害并不意味着别人是菜鸟(相信我,我对美国潜艇力量的能力没别的看法只有极度膜拜)。自鸣得意和吹牛逼并不是往训练规则里加的最好项目。
-------------译者:clibra-审核者:龙腾翻译总管------------
Frank 14°35'N/120°59'E TDog • 2 days ago
T, my reply to you above which TNI doesn't approve. Just checking if it will pass here.
T,我之前给你的回复TNI没有审核通过。查看一下是否在这能发出来。
"Well T, look up my answers to our friend Sinbad. I just shattered his false notions about nuclear subs. And the techno wizard @Leroy agrees with me!
好吧,T,看看我对我们的朋友辛巴达的回答。我仅仅是粉碎了他关于核潜艇的错误观念。并且技术砖家Leroy同意我的观点。
Hey, I didn't say the Virginia were all the master in all arenas, and I didn't say its perfect, but the fact is, it can beat whatever the Chinese and Russians can throw at us! Won't you agree?
嗨,我没有说弗吉尼亚级(潜艇)是所有领域的主宰,我也并没说它是完美的,但事实是,它能击败无论中国人还是俄国人能扔过来对付我们的所有东西!难道你不同意吗?
And we're not gonna sit back and say, "There's no way anyone can beat us! We're too awesome!" Complacency is murder on preparedness." That's the reason we got the Virginia! And it's a continuing process, and we will strive further to improve it. ASW doctrines, and all!
而且我们不会坐回来叨叨“任何人都无法击败我们,我们太牛逼了!” 自满会毁掉作战准备。那就是我们装备弗吉尼亚级的原因。这是个不间断的过程,并且我们将更加努力去完善它,反潜战教条,和其它所有。
I know you hate the military establishment T, but not all of us are beholden to the MIC. Rest assured that we got you covered and we can even tolerate your pro-China stance from time to time.You have educated me some time, but you gotta admit, I have educated you this time! How about an upvote?"
我知道你仇视军事建设,T,但不是所有人都受惠于军工复合体。 毫无疑问我们掩护了你,而且我们甚至能容忍你时不时的亲华立场。你曾经有时候教育过我,但你得承认,这次是我教育了你! 给点个赞吧?
-------------译者:clibra-审核者:龙腾翻译总管------------
TDog Frank 14°35'N/120°59'E • 2 days ago
Just to be clear, I don't hate the military establishment. What I do hate, however, is the tremendous amount of waste, corruption, and manipulation that it currently entails. Too often the excuse of sacrifice is used to justify further sacrifice - the results gained become the reason for it in the first place.
只澄清一点,我不仇视军事机构。 然而,我仇视的是它(指军事机构)现在引起的海量的浪费、腐败,和幕后操纵。太多的牺牲的借口用来替更多的牺牲辩护,得到的结果变成了起初的原因。
I also don't like blowhards. Within the realm of foreign policy, that demographic is over-represented by military fanboys and so when I counter them or disagree with them, I tend to look 'anti-military" even though I'm not. The most common mistake people make (and I'm NOT accusing you of this) is to confuse a lack of slavish devotion with an unalloyed hatred of the military.
我也不喜欢吹牛大王。在对外政策领域,人数统计被军迷小盆友过度代表了,所以当我反对或者不同意他们的时候,虽然我不是,但我就看上去像“反军事”。人们犯的最常见错误(我不~是~在说你)就是把远离盲从的热爱和纯粹的仇视军事混淆起来。
And to be completely honest, you've been very educational in all of your posts. I sometimes forget to upvote you, but you do have my respect.
完全老实地说,你的所有帖子都很有教育意义。 我有时候忘了给你点赞,但我确实尊敬你。
-------------译者:clibra-审核者:龙腾翻译总管------------
Nostradamus leroy • 2 days ago
Hey now coRUpSSIA can build state of the art subs. Remember Kursk??? so advanced it took a team of 5 SEALs to destroy it in 10 minutes, while the whole coRUpSSIAN Navy Fleet was conducting exercises yet they failed to detect the US sub that was in their proximity???
嗨,现在俄国能造顶尖水平的潜艇了。记得库尔斯克号吗??? 那么先进!让一个5人的海豹小组用了10分钟才摧毁,而那时正在演习的整个俄国海军舰队居然没有发现正在附近的美国潜艇??? (这货太能给米帝海军脸上贴金了,洛杉矶级上的海豹运载器把海豹运到库尔斯克号上炸毁它?意淫无极限啊! 而且这货挺仇视俄国,居然生造了“腐俄”coRUpSSIA这个词)
Orel is a state of the art sub too. Name one other sub that has the capability to set itself on fire WHILE BEING REPAIRED ON DRY DOCK!!!
Orel也是顶尖水平的潜艇。 你能找出其他在干船坞上维修时就能把自己点着的潜艇吗。 (译者按:这货嘲笑俄国的时候,忘了自己的洛杉矶级也在停泊时发生过火灾。)
Sand_Cat Nostradamus • 2 days ago
You're no better than the others posting insults, and not very clever ones at that.
Facts, please, on topic, please.
你比其他喷子没好到哪去,而且喷的不算很聪明。
事实,拜托,请切题。
Nostradamus Sand_Cat • 2 days ago
Its not a fact that Kursk sank while on exercise??? Its not a fact that Orel submarine got destroyed from.fire while on repairs in DRY DOCK???
Stupid coRUpSSIAN slav
难道库尔斯克号在演习时沉没不是事实吗?难道Orel号在干船坞上维修时起火被毁不是事实吗?
你这个愚蠢的俄国奴!
-------------译者:clibra-审核者:龙腾翻译总管------------
International Thinker Nostradamus • a day ago
On 1 March 2012 Miami pulled into the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in Kittery, Maine for a scheduled 20-month Engineered Overhaul (EOH) and system upgrades. A civilian employee started a fire aboard the boat on 23 May 2012. It impacted the forward compartment of the submarine which includes crew living, command and control spaces and torpedo room. The revised estimate to restore Miami increased to approximately $450 million with completion estimated on 30 April 2015. Due to budget cuts, it was announced 6 August 2013 that the vessel would not be repaired and placed on the inactive list.[1] On 28 March 2014, Miami was formally decommissioned.[3]
Stupid Yankeee Yanker hahahah
2012年3月1日,迈阿密号被拖进位于缅因州Kittery的朴茨茅斯海军船厂进行计划中的为期20个月的工程大修和系统升级。2012年5月23日,一个文职顾员在艇内纵火。这对潜艇的前隔舱,包含艇员生活舱、指挥控制区和鱼雷舱造成了冲击。维修迈阿密号的费用估值上升到了4.5亿美元,估计在2015年4月30日完成。由于预算削减,2013年8月6日宣布此艇将不会被修理并被放入退役名单。2014年3月28日,迈阿密号正式退役。
愚蠢的美国佬!哈哈哈! (译者按:还真有人知道这个例子来打脸了。)
Eagle International Thinker • a day ago
In 2003, a chinese sub carrying a bunch of chinese Admirals choked its entire crew to death. It was drifting in the ocean when found with no survivors. I'm surprised the chinese didn't blame SEALs for doing it.
2003年,一艘中国潜艇载着一堆中国将军发生了窒息事故导致全体艇员死亡。(译者按:指361潜艇通气管窒息事故) 潜艇被发现时在海上漂着,无人生还。我很奇怪为啥中国人没有指责是海豹突击队干的这事。(这位貌似是打脸前面的那个“海豹无敌”的鼓吹者。)
-------------译者:clibra-审核者:龙腾翻译总管------------
International Thinker Eagle • a day ago
Dont lose your cool bald vulture.
别失掉你的冷静,秃鹰。
Eagle International Thinker • a day ago
I didn't lose my cool. Did you know about the chinese sub disaster?
我没有失去冷静。你了解那起中国潜艇事故吗?
International Thinker Eagle • a day ago
There is soo much to read on Umerican sub disasters hard to keep up with the other dudes.
美国的潜艇事故已经多的看不完了,没空去关心别家的事故,童鞋。
Aivar Krisenko Nostradamus • 2 days ago
You mean USS Miami? The Navy had to decommission her in 2014 because of the fire, intentionally started in 2012 by a civilian employee. It was a weekend and he wanted to leave early to start partying.
你指美国海军迈阿密号潜艇?由于发生火灾,海军不得不在2014年将其除役。是在2012年被一个文职人员故意纵火的。那是个周末,那人想早点下班参加聚会(于是烧了把火)。
Nostradamus Aivar Krisenko • 2 days ago
USS Miami as u said it so well, was set on fire on PURPOSE, it didn't egulf itself on fire like Orel did while on repairs. And it definately wasnt destroyed by spetsNAZI ops to answer the US Navy for destroying Kurks tin can in 2001
你说的很好,美国海军迈阿密号潜艇是被故意纵火的,它不像Orel号那样在维修时被火吞没。它也并不是被“信号旗”特种部队摧毁来报复美国海军2001年摧毁库尔斯克号潜艇。
-------------译者:clibra-审核者:龙腾翻译总管------------
Aivar Krisenko Nostradamus • 3 hours ago
I'm sad to inform you that setting your OWN nuclear sub on fire in order to get off work early does not qet you far in this life. Overall, all of us on this board are very impressed with your 'knowledge" of issues regarding Russian, Chinese & US sub fleets. Judging by your comments and especially language you use, you could totally qualify to work at local Publix bagging groceries for old people. Have a nice day!
我很悲哀地告诉你,为了早下班就在自家的核潜艇上纵火不能让你多活几天。 总的来说,这版面上的所有人都对你的关于俄国、中国和美国的潜艇舰队的“知识”印象深刻。从你的评论特别是你用的语言可以判断出,你完全能胜任在当地的大众超市给老年人打包货物的工作。祝你愉快!
我们致力于传递世界各地老百姓最真实、最直接、最详尽的对中国的看法
【版权与免责声明】如发现内容存在版权问题,烦请提供相关信息发邮件,
我们将及时沟通与处理。本站内容除非来源注明五毛网,否则均为网友转载,涉及言论、版权与本站无关。
本文仅代表作者观点,不代表本站立场。
本文来自网络,如有侵权及时联系本网站。
Why do most people who have a positive view of China have been to ...
Why do most people who have a positive view of China have been to ...