dark light

Saturn5

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 48 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Israeli warship 'badly damaged' by 'explosive drone' #2047394
    Saturn5
    Participant

    http://xs303.xs.to/xs303/06295/hanit.jpg

    Hanit in harbor.

    in reply to: Israeli warship 'badly damaged' by 'explosive drone' #2047694
    Saturn5
    Participant

    If she indeed carried her 76mm, then there wouldn’t have been a Phalanx, that was what I intended to come to with beginning question of what she was actually doing there.

    According to the news reports she was bombarding the shore.

    in reply to: Israeli warship 'badly damaged' by 'explosive drone' #2047771
    Saturn5
    Participant

    What happened is a classic example of a successful ambush. And anyone can fall victim to a carefully planed ambush.

    Most probably the Israeli Navy did often appear, off the coast of Beirut even before this conflict has started. So the enemy had the time and opportunity to work out the routine of Israeli Navy.

    When the shooting has started the enemy observed the routine of the Israeli warships again and set up its ambush accordingly.

    The Sa’ar 5 class can carry either one Phalanx or one 76mm. According to the news the ship was bombarding the airfield thus she must be carrying a 76mm. She had no CIWS other than VLS Barak missiles at the time of the incident.

    Why the warship did not deployed her soft and hard kill measures is beyond my knowledge. But usually in an ambush one gets caught with the pants down.

    This is the second time that an Israeli warship has been ambushed. Last time the destroyer Eilat was not as lucky.

    As for the damage I am believe that we will never see the photos showing the actual damage. The Israeli propaganda machinery would not allow Hezbollah using the photos of the damage for their own purpose.

    Most of the AShM missiles carry their own oxidizers. Even if the warhead does not explode the fuel and the oxidizer keep on burning in the ship. That can cause more damage than actual explosion of the warhead.

    There are a couple lessons for any navy to learn from this incident:
    1) Try not to fell into ambushes
    2) The time spend training the crew for damage control for the case that the ship hits always pays back

    in reply to: Sinking USS Towers Oct 2002 #2049206
    Saturn5
    Participant

    Before we start to jump hasty conclusions about the effects of various weapons I would like to remind you that the ships used of sinking are just empty steel hulls.

    Ironically it is more difficult to sink an empty, old warship void of any kind of burning, exploding or fume and heat creating materials, than rendering a in service warship to mission unworthy.

    in reply to: Russian Navy : News & Discussion #2574644
    Saturn5
    Participant

    Maxpain: Can you see the second and the last photo now? Or are they still AWOL?

    in reply to: Russian Navy : News & Discussion #2060992
    Saturn5
    Participant

    Maxpain: Can you see the second and the last photo now? Or are they still AWOL?

    in reply to: Russian Navy : News & Discussion #2580568
    Saturn5
    Participant

    These Russian warships are in Istanbul att the moment:

    Sb-36 support ship:
    http://xs70.xs.to/pics/06091/sb36.jpg

    151 Azov LST:
    http://xs70.xs.to/pics/06091/151.jpg

    121 Moskova cruiser:
    http://xs70.xs.to/pics/06091/121.jpg

    http://xs70.xs.to/pics/06091/121_2.jpg

    http://xs70.xs.to/pics/06091/121_3.jpg

    http://xs70.xs.to/pics/06091/121_4.jpg

    http://xs70.xs.to/pics/06091/121_5.jpg

    in reply to: Russian Navy : News & Discussion #2061527
    Saturn5
    Participant

    These Russian warships are in Istanbul att the moment:

    Sb-36 support ship:
    http://xs70.xs.to/pics/06091/sb36.jpg

    151 Azov LST:
    http://xs70.xs.to/pics/06091/151.jpg

    121 Moskova cruiser:
    http://xs70.xs.to/pics/06091/121.jpg

    http://xs70.xs.to/pics/06091/121_2.jpg

    http://xs70.xs.to/pics/06091/121_3.jpg

    http://xs70.xs.to/pics/06091/121_4.jpg

    http://xs70.xs.to/pics/06091/121_5.jpg

    in reply to: Hellenic Navy (News & Views). #2064406
    Saturn5
    Participant

    Efaristo poli, Petros, excellent pictures. This is definitely not the calm Aegean we are used to see in summer.

    in reply to: Updates on the Royal Navy's CVF project #2069378
    Saturn5
    Participant

    Some good news at last!!

    I was of the understanding that us and the French were going in together on these as well, the UK for 2 carriers and the french for a third. What happened to these plans?

    French defence procurement agency DGA has formally awarded DCN and Thales a “relay contract” to continue their work on design of the planned ‘PA2’ aircraft carrier. This marks a major milestone in the design of this second carrier for the French Navy. The PA2 design phase was officially launched by French Minister for Defence in January 2005. The studies undertaken since early 2005 have focused on the opportunities for cooperation between the French PA2 and the British CVF programmes. These studies concluded, moreover, that the basic CVF design could, with limited tailoring, meet the French Navy’s requirements.

    in reply to: Updates on the Royal Navy's CVF project #2069508
    Saturn5
    Participant

    Some time ago there were rumors that France may join England and that the two would design the CVF for their own operational needs. According to latest issue of Warships International, France is definetly out of the project but may buy the ship off the shelf.

    in reply to: Hellenic Navy (News & Views). #2070058
    Saturn5
    Participant

    Fremm has the advantedge over Spruance’s of being new and European. But on the other hand Freem project is too expensive. The deal of Fremm was twice postponed because of financial difficulties. The whole project costs around $11 billion for 27 ships. That makes ca. $400 million for one ship.

    I wonder how Greece will find money to participate in Fremm programme, if even Italy and France find it difficult to pay.

    The answer was NO (as in NO WAY)…..Then they gave the Spruances to Turkey along with an Anchorage Dockship…….Just to keep the balance…..

    US Senate authorized the US Goverment to grand one Spruance and to sell one Spruance. There are no other scheduled trasnfers from USN to Turkish Navy.

    in reply to: An idea? #2071056
    Saturn5
    Participant

    Interesting idea. These ships/boats could be a good strike platform.

    But I do not think that these new breed of warships would be suitable to operations other than war like: Showing the flag, gunboat diplomacy, boarding of commecial vessels, enforcing embargoes etc.

    These OOTW tasks take up a lot of the capasities of todays navies and becomming more and more important every day.

    in reply to: HMS Nottingham #2071622
    Saturn5
    Participant

    The captain and the navigator were reprimanded. The second-in-command, and the officer of the watch were dismissed from their duties.

    More @
    http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/uk.cfm?id=1006822003

    in reply to: Indian navy – news & discussion #2072634
    Saturn5
    Participant

    The plus side of acquiring USS Trenton is that she is ready to enter the service in Indian Navy. The negative side is of course her age.

    In all other solutions whether that may be a building an indigenous designed LPD or buying a new vessel from another country, Indian Navy has to wait for years.

    Apparently the Indian Navy needs a new amphibious vessel and does not want to wait long.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 48 total)