dark light

AegisFC

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 138 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Cancelling the F-35C ? #2012503
    AegisFC
    Participant

    by Winslow T. Wheeler and Pierre M. Sprey

    :rolleyes: Those two jackasses are almost as bad as Kopp.

    in reply to: US Aircraft Carrier Vulnerable #2013609
    AegisFC
    Participant

    Consider:

    http://www.navysite.de/cvn/cv59.htm#acc

    There were a LOT of mistakes made during the Forestall fire that just made things worse. For example one team would lay down a layer of fire fighting foam and another team would inadvertently wash it off the deck and quite a few crewmen didn’t know the basics of damage control. After the “Forest Fire” the USN took a hard look at all the damage control lessons it forgot from WW2.

    . One submarine could wreck an entire CBG if it is lucky.

    If the entire group is close together for a photo op maybe. Other than that I doubt it, most of the time the escorts are fairly spread out to cover the most area.

    in reply to: LPH's (mistral, Ocean, etc)what are your views on them #2014788
    AegisFC
    Participant

    The USN have just launched their 1st helicopter ship not to have a dock i think.

    The 60’s era Iwo Jima class LPH’s didn’t have a dock.

    The America class isn’t even in production yet, let alone launched.

    in reply to: USN LHA/LHD question: why no ski-jump? #2019126
    AegisFC
    Participant

    It’s worth noting that a LPH/LHA/LHD is primarily an amphibious warfare platform and not an aircraft carrier. This is why unobstructed deck space is more vital than a permanent ski jump. Harriers most likely would fly off to an austere shore base in the event of a real wartime scenario.

    With the coming of the F-35B, and its far more adequate take off performance, a ski jump would be even less desirable aboard large American LHD/LHAs.

    I remember an article that stated that adding a ski-jump would take up a helo landing spot and that spot was deemed more important than a ski jump for a handful of jump jets.

    in reply to: USN LHA/LHD question: why no ski-jump? #2019128
    AegisFC
    Participant

    (and USCG) come under the USN in the Pentagon.

    Only during a time of war. Since 2003 it is part of Homeland Security.

    in reply to: PLAN Carrier Updates. #2019143
    AegisFC
    Participant

    but why on earth put it on top of a building? why not do it like they did with the invincible mock up on terra ferma

    Maybe the floor below has a mockup of the hangar and maintenance facilities?

    in reply to: Navies news from around the world -II #2020137
    AegisFC
    Participant

    Looks like LCS-1 picked up a new pair of guns.

    http://www.navy.mil/management/photodb/webphoto/web_090928-N-7241L-149.jpg

    in reply to: largest payload on nuclear weapons by 1 aircraft #2437777
    AegisFC
    Participant

    LOL! I think both sides did some crazy stuff back in those days (and probably still today). I read one account where there was a Soviet naval exercise going on and a US frigate shadowing it sent out a Zodiac (fast inflatable boat), grabbed one of their practice torpedos that had surfaced and was towing it back to the boat when the Rooskies figured it out and made them cut it loose. 😀

    There are stories of Soviet “fishing boats” following the USNS Observation Island around and then rushing in and attempting to grab any debris from any SLBM’s test firings from the SSBN that was near by.

    in reply to: Obama scraps BMD in Czech Republic & Poland #1812591
    AegisFC
    Participant

    The Aegis BMD community loves this announcement, very good news indeed.

    in reply to: Lets make a better Calendar!!! #2022216
    AegisFC
    Participant

    I spent almost 9 years in the USN and I have plenty of pictures my shipmates and I took while on deployments.

    http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a10/dubalicious42/Stout/DSC00691a.jpg

    http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a10/dubalicious42/Stout/DSC00690a.jpg]

    http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a10/dubalicious42/Stout/DSC00689a.jpg

    http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a10/dubalicious42/Stout/skylineleave1.jpg

    http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a10/dubalicious42/Stout/IMG_1966.jpg

    http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a10/dubalicious42/Stout/IMG_1967.jpg

    http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a10/dubalicious42/Stout/IMG_1912.jpg

    http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a10/dubalicious42/Stout/IMG_1908.jpg

    http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a10/dubalicious42/Stout/IMG_1918.jpg

    in reply to: SM-3 racks up another kill. . . #1814498
    AegisFC
    Participant

    Targets are reported as simulating SRBM’s. Going by what the MDA releases that means it should be one of the Orbital SRALT’s that was used. SRALT is a single stage system (essentially the 2nd stage off an old Minuteman) converted for air-drop launch out the back of a C-17.

    Think I saw a figure of about 3600mph quoted for re-entry velocity somewhere, so, on the TBM side not full-fat ICBM velocities. Hopefully someone can confirm that.

    Most of the Aegis BMD tests used ground launched missiles (used to be converted Terrier’s but I think those are all used up) on a ballistic profile.

    This release from the MDA…

    http://www.mda.mil/mdalink/pdf/09news0015.pdf

    Suggests the missile was also ground launched.

    in reply to: Navies news from around the world #2030259
    AegisFC
    Participant

    Does anyone else find the picture of a Typhoon submarine just cruising past the beach a little bit hard to belive. The people on the beach don’t even seem to notice there is a HUGE missile carrying sub about 50 yards offshore. Wouldn’t it be a bit risky to be that close to land. Anyone else think they have seen this picture before without the beach?

    Hopefully next time i’m down portobello beach HMS Vanguard can cruise buy. Maybe even fire off a couple of tridents just for show?

    Perfectly believable if the sub was getting underway or returning to port.

    I’ve seen ships and subs get underway from Mayport, Fl when I used to live in Atlantic Beach.

    AegisFC
    Participant

    Unless it moved under its own power then no, it isn’t news.

    in reply to: Perry Class #2038173
    AegisFC
    Participant

    They should be considered frigates ‘fitted for but not with’ Harpoon and Standard missiles.

    Which is the opposite of the normal meaning. 😀

    in reply to: Indian navy – news & discussion #2038204
    AegisFC
    Participant

    Oh, and with ESSM quad packed into some of its VLS cells it is definately not going to have less firepower then the 6,800t Kolkata class destroyers in terms of its primary mission (AAW) though with 8 Harpoons it only carries half the number of SSM’s.

    8 Harpoons should be enough for any over the horizon engagement (especially if you have multiple allied ships or aircraft doing a coordinated strike from different directions), but for anything within line of sight of the illuminators SM-2’s in surface to surface mode would be quicker to fire than a harpoon, and at least for the USN the preferred option in that situation.

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 138 total)