HMS Victory did have a ‘sister’ ship (can’t remember its name) that was towed out to sea in the 1950s and blown-up…

…hope this government review doesn’t rediscover that ‘preservation’ option! :diablo:

Edit: The ship I mentioned above was HMS Implacable, the former 74-gun Duguay Trouin, captured from the French after Trafalgar. Apparently she was offered back to France but sadly the offer was not accepted on the grounds of the cost of restoring and maintaining her. She was scuttled in 1947.

Be a good listener…..and that doesn’t just mean let her do some of the talking; a week later, hopefully on a second date, she’ll expect you to remember where she went to school, her sister’s name and whatever else she told you about herself. If you’re really interested in her remembering all this shouldn’t be difficult and an ‘oh, you remembered!’ is always worth points.

My two cents, for what it’s worth.

If you take a look at the low resolution picture I posted a bit back, you will see in that semi- alongside shot the “petals” as I “described” them 😮 clearly going outwards…. considering the planking on the side of the ship must be at least an inch ( 25,4 mm) thick, I reach the conclusion that they were “blown outwards” by the blast of the warhead. I can not imagine those “petals” being first pushed inwards by the hit of the bulk of the missile and then blown back as result of the aftershock…

It is an interesting technical argument as to whether the warhead of the Exocet that struck HMS Sheffield exploded or not but either way quite academic since HMS Sheffield made no further contribution to the British cause from the second that she was hit.

I think your estimate of the hull plating thickness of HMS Sheffield may be too high; I would suggest a thickness of nearer 10mm.

As others have suggested the ‘petal’ damage to the hull plating that you point out could well have been caused simply by the high-speed impact of the Exocet. The photo that you posted is interesting as it is taken from close to the angle at which the Exocet struck HMS Sheffield, at an acute angle with the hull, travelling from bow to stern. Notice how the forward edge of the hole does not have a petal as the hull at this point would have been pushed in during the impact. Notice also that the top and bottom petals are much longer than the petal at the aft edge of the hole possibly indicating that they were caused as the Exocet pierced the plate while moving from bow to stern.

Surely if these petals were caused by the explosion of the warhead they would be pushed out on all sides of the hole (and, of course, the damage would be considerably greater).

Apologies for resurrecting this thread, I don’t often ‘trespass’ into the modern forum but this thread is somewhat historic and has made very interesting reading.

I don’t know what we’re all worrying about if all goes according to plan the risk of a catastrophe are negligible…..however in the previous large experiment of this kind two beer bottles were found inside the collider itself…

…but I’m sure that was considered during the risk assessment! 😀

Anyway the media has got it all wrong, today, Wednesday, is just a test with one beam and no collisions. :rolleyes:

I mean, let’s face it, WE, as aviation enthusiasts, would appreciate the scenes of bomber crews going down in their aluminium coffins, the Luftwaffe tearing into the formations and the Little Friends doing their best to fend them off, but the average cinema-goer, Mr John Smith and his family of Smiths, would be bored of seeing umpteen B-17s etc going down in flames…

Augsburg?….B-17s going down in flames?….has there been a Hollywood remake already? :diablo:

The Japanese code in question was called Purple (by the US) and was surprisingly based on the twenty-six characters of the ‘English’ alphabet! It was broken by both the British and the US but whether separately or in co-operation I’m not sure.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PURPLE

I’m wondering, has there ever been a film about the Taranto raid though?

I don’t know much about it but I know enough to judge it would make a great film.

It would make a great film…..no need to build any flying replica Swordfish either! :diablo:

Only the hull of the USS Arizona is under the surface of the water and several large pieces, notably one of the gun turret barbettes, are above the surface so the water where she sank could well be only 40 feet deep.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:DN-SD-06-09336.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Arizona_Memorial_3.jpg

In fact the water of Pearl Harbor was so shallow that the Japanese aerial torpedoes had to be modified so that they could be dropped without sticking into the bottom.

After Hamilton ‘cut’ the chicane he clearly realised he could be penalised and so sensibly dropped back, as they crossed the start-line he was behind, and moving slower than Raikkonen but then in a breathtaking manoeuvre Hamilton dived back inside Raikkonen ahead of the hairpin, apparently taking him by surprise. All Raikkonen could do in reply was collide with Hamilton’s rear tyre.

Later Hamilton demonstrated how much he outclassed Raikkonen today when the latter crashed-out in the rain. What should have been remembered as a great Grand Prix will now descend into another farce of controversy and ‘race politics’.

At least Raikkonen had the decency to do nothing more that ‘toe the line’ in his post-race interviews.

I’m glad McLaren are appealing this decision.