And I wanted a hoboe!

That… seems a little optimistic? I hope you’re right but I’d be surprised.

Might be good to retire that factoid, it’s really a very poor way to view european history.

It wasn’t long ago that I was using “Anglo-Saxon” to refer to the people of early medieval England — in fact, the word appears in the title of my doctoral dissertation. Since completing my doctoral work, I’ve learned that “Anglo-Saxon” has had a racist history since at least as early as the nineteenth century, both in Europe and in America. Additionally, it was a term very rarely used by people during the Middle Ages. By the time the kingdom of England was unified (to some extent) in the tenth century, people would have referred to it as the kingdom of the English (or Englisc), not of the Anglo-Saxons.

For the past few years, scholars have debated what the least problematic, most appropriate alternative to “Anglo-Saxon” would be. I have switched to using “early medieval” and “English”, broader terms that more accurately reflect the diversity of this historical period. I myself am a “medievalist” or “medieval scholar”. Language matters.

(source)

Didn’t they have a comic book series or something?

It’s not particularly doing any work, and a great deal less than the statement you made that I’m referencing. You just want to poke holes in an argument you refuse to engage with substantively, and now you’re just insulting me… why? If your position has merit, why avoid addressing all of the massive glaring flaws I’ve pointed out, instead of being a jerk?

You don’t understand, all that suffering and all those dead babies are part of His plaaaaaaan. How can you even have morals without believing in god, please excuse the piles of dead babies.

If that were true, I suspect you would have answered the question instead of dodging it (and the fundamental logistical realities you ignored) in favor of going the route of asserting that you’re correct, without any explanation, while ignoring the logistical realities of the situation you have proposed when they’re in turn explained to you…

While in general your statement may indeed have merit, subsurface static infrastructure is not easy to find or access. For that matter, neither is this a situation in which subsurface vessels have a wide range of depths they can hide within. Hundreds upon hundreds of them crammed into a small area is not so much asymmetric maritime warfare as it is shooting squids in a barrel.

A shocking revelation!

To borrow your own words:

Answer my question

But seriously, If you’re already trying to dodge the question, seems pretty clear you can see where this is going.

So, how many pipes currently run under your house/apartment/van/whatever?

Russia is already fairly adept at the sabotage of static marine infrastructure

Oh good grief. Yes, sure, they and china have done plenty to sabotage marine cables. Civilian cable, however, is not generally guarded. The solution to someone dragging an anchor between Sweden and Lithuania is international sanctions; the solution to someone doing it between Qeshm and Ash Sha’m is to blow the ship up. With missiles. Just… the idea that hundreds of large moving vessels would be harder to find than a Big Hose buried at the bottom of the sea is just. Really, really wrong.

Additionally, you would need more submarines than currently exist to make this even slightly viable just to make up the difference for the US’s import thru the straight. And not only is the US *the world’s largest producer of LNG, the amount of LNG it imports through the straight per year is approximately Three Santiago’s worth. Which is both practically nothing in scale, and would require 30,000 round trips, or 82 6-hour round trips every day.

For context, china would need… uh… Napkin math says, using the largest Narco sub ever recorded (which was only semi-submersible) it would take 22 THOUSAND 6 hour trips per day.

Seriously, this is dumb. Even Big Hose is dumb. Having a whole bunch of unmaned submersible SCVs running your vespene through a sea-mine infested strait is a ridiculously unworkable idea. Why would anyone even want to do this? If you can field that many UUVs, surely you could just build a regular pipeline instead of all this Wile E Coyote nonsense.

Ah, I see. Sorry for any confusion, I just meant we were talking about a specific study.

Absolutely nothing! It’s an excellent point.

Look I could keep this up as this kind of thing is basically my catnip, but to explain further why Big Hose, submarine cables/pipelines are buried. And also LNG is 1/2 the density of water. (Large tanks of LNG will float, which makes them very fun in floods if they get ripped off their mounts!)

My goodness, what a good point. Looks like Big Hose is back on the menu, boys.

Also Iran can’t see into the ocean, in this war the US navy owns the ocean beneath the surface wholly and entirely, there is no reliable way for Iran to locate or hit subsurface vessels

No, it’s trivially easy for them to do that. That’s why we can’t have Big Hose.

Or, and hear me out: Big hose.

Immune to sea mines, easily buried, doesn’t rely on a fleet of hundreds of small, easily identified vessels full of pressurized hydrocarbons that you will be continuously hooking and unhooking from tankers on either end of the strait, where Iran could clearly see what you’re doing and just like… put out a couple nets.

(also no. No, Big Hose is not trivially easy to cut. It is in fact very difficult to do that.)

I think… Yes? I’m a tad confused, I confess: I don’t think anyone here has misunderstood anything.

GASLOG SANTIAGO […] Her summer deadweight capacity is 82,178 tonnes. (source)

[…] the Orca will incorporate a more modular construction, primarily for the capability to be built with an additional payload module of up to 34 feet (10 m) long and a capacity of 8 tonnes (source)

So a bit over 10,000 trips with the largest public UUV (which is a single prototype) to replace a single Santiago-sized ship. And the Santiago is roughly 1/2 the capacity of a QMAX LNG tanker. By my napkin math, you’d need 1300 trips per day with the Orca XL to replace the volume of natural gas the US imported thru the strait before it was closed.

I’m not saying you’re exactly wrong, just that circumventing a blockade with this for energy supply isn’t reasonable. The max capacity per trip is one small propane truck’s worth of fuel. You could absolutely use this to transfer fuel to something like a clandestine group for power generation or what-have-you, but in no world would using these for LNG supply on the scale of even a single ship be viable. Seriously, if that’s the goal you could just pile BBQ Propane tanks into a Los Angeles sub and transport 10x the fuel - without burning any diesel.

(Edit: Additionally, the Orca’s reported top speed is 15km/hr. At that speed, it would take at best 6.5 hours to run the blockades - and that’s a conservative estimate of the size of the Iran-controlled zone.)

Truly, a much better solution would just be a long hose.

I think like… theoretically yes, UUVs could be used to circumvent a blockade. But I really can’t see them being used to ferry LNG, there just isn’t enough volume in one to fit much of anything. Even in the Orca XL (which the US Navy has only a single prototype of) the space is primarily taken up by systems - the payload capacity is quite small, and LNG tanks have some pretty inherent shape requirements that don’t make them terribly efficient in small spaces. I’d more expect UUVs to ferry high value, small volume goods like cash, ammunition, intelligence, etc.

More likely is some kind of underwater pipeline run thru the strait ala Operation Pluto, but even that is a tad far fetched.

I would be surprised if a small number of these transfers weren’t to unmanned underwater vehicles meant to demonstrate the capacity to run blockades with logistics using UUVs.

Like… as fuel?

What an overwraught title. “Advertising company pitches effectiveness of their advertisements” like… yeah, that’s what they do? They’re desperately trying to figure out how to make reddit profitable because boy-fuckin’-howdy are they doomed, this is just yet another in a long line of wildly exaggerated pitches they’ve made.