Not too difficult to get this one eh Ja!?. The pennant number narrows it down a bit and the type of chopper is a bit of a clue as well!.

The ship is a USN auxlliary and is listed as the IX514. She was built at the Pacific Coast Engineering yard, Alameda, as a harbour utility craft commissioning in 1968 with the pennant YFU79. The ship was converted to the configuration you see in the photo in 1986 and, as you rightly guessed, is used for basic flight training of chopper crews. She’s based at Pensacola, Florida.

Specs:
Displacement: 380 tons (full load)
Dimensions: 125 x 36 x 7.5ft
Propulsion: 4 GM Diesels; 619hp output. 2 shafts
Max Speed: 8 knots

Sorry Glenn et al the ‘current’ Almirante Grau isn’t the Mod. Fiji-Class you’ve illustrated. That vessel carried the name prior to the introduction of the two former Dutch cruisers of the Eendracht-class in 1973.

Details at: http://leden.tref.nl/~jviss000/Eendracht.htm

Russian anti-torp systems

Hopefully GarryB might jump in here and flesh this out a little bit from one of his sources, but, heres some stuff on the new Russian UDAV-1 anti-torp system:

The UDAV-1 system is designed to use different types of rockets for highly efficient multi-layer defence of surface ships against torpedoes. The system is also capable of engaging submarines and frogmen.

The system comprises:

the KT-153 remotely controlled multi-barrel automated launcher with indirect elevation/traverse stabilisation;

the 111SG depth-charge rockets with HE warhead and impact-time fuse to engage underwater targets;
the 111SZ mine-laying rockets with hydroacoustic proximity fuse for remote mining of a water area to make a barrier for incoming torpedoes;

the 111SO decoy rockets to divert homing torpedoes from the surface ship by creating false acoustic target;

the fire control devices;

the ammunition lading device;

ground support equipment.

The UDAV-1 MLRS operates in conjunction with the ship’s sonar

credit: http://home19.inet.tele.dk/airwing/ships/asw.htm

The Russians have made the most effort in this regard wolf. They have a number of rounds for their RBU systems intended to drop accoustic ‘jammers’ and mine-type hardkill rounds in front of an inbound. These are spliced into the ships sonar suite and, if memory serves, have an automatic mode to act as an anti-torpedo CIWS after a fashion.

Historically the NATO navies never expended much effort in this direction as, with our sonar superiority, we always expected to have the first shot or, at least, first contact for evasion. If a torpedo did head inbound then there were always passive decoys that were confidently expected to seduce a Soviet era seeker head.

Now though, with the move to the littoral battlespace, the chances of getting caught out by a sneaky SSN firing, altogether too smart, homing torps are altogether too high for such complacency to be maintained and anti-torpedo hardkill is being studied. The most radical I’ve heard of was a US system, apparently being looked at by NAVSEA, that used a powerful directed ‘water pulse’ to disrupt mines and torpedoes in shallow water from standoff distances. I’ll do some digging and post up whatever I find OK?.

Always amuses me how Sandy Woodward developed a flair for the dramatic after ‘100 days’ was published!.

The line about it being ‘a good job the Argentines packed in on 14 June’ always puts me into hysterics!. Woodward had plans in hand, before the Task Force even arrived at the Falklands, for a prolonged conflict extending through the South Atlantic winter. Fought in the manner that the war was prosecuted put us on a higher optempo footing that necessitated a quicker victory – which was why the timetable was set for an assault on Stanley, thusly a conclusion to the conflict, before the last week in June.

For Woodward to make the intimation that, had the Argentines held-on for one more week, the eventual outcome could have been vastly different is being selective with the facts to say the very least!.

That was actually pointed out during the documentary, but not in the review I posted. The Belgrano itself was never really a direct threat to either of the RN carriers…but the two destroyers that were sailing in the Belgrano “battle group” both carried Exocet missiles.

In that case the documentary was also a little selective with the facts!. The Belgrano may have been almost a relic when compared to the modern bells&whistles destroyers and frigates it was facing BUT it was a relic protected by several thousand tons of armour plate packing a serious shell throw-weight!. Woodward himself realised, and noted, that he had only two weapons systems available to him that would be able to seriously hurt Belgrano. Those being 1000lb’ers from the seriously overstretched SHAR fleet and the 21″ Mk8 torpedoes carried by the subs. Had Belgrano, evaded the SSN’s (as the carrier managed to do) and managed to get inside of guns range to the fleet it could very conceivably wreaked absolute havoc on our ships. It was very definitely a threat that could not be ignored!.

The course issue is also a bit of a fallacy as well. The important thing was the ships position more than its course. As I remember the charts it was just to the west of the Burdowood Bank, west of the TF’s position, an area of shallow water decidedly unfriendly to submerged SSN’s attempting to remain covert. The scare was that, had the Belgrano group turned back east and plugged in a speed run, that Conks wouldnt have been able to keep track on the group through the shallows. Losing touch with the group was not something that could be risked so the firing order to Conqueror was a necessity…simple as that unfortunately.

Fantastic! Yet another Navy that wants to get a High Value Unit without adequate screening vessels in place to protect it!

That is, of course, unless the Israeli Navies concept of “expeditionary” and “long-range” is defined by the outer extents of Israeli Air Force cover!.

First off sincere thanks, Flood, for taking the time to clarify the statement you made that had me so confused. Longest post by you I’ve seen in quite a while and I feel appropriately honoured!.

You seem to be basing most of your position below on the fact that routine paperwork can sometimes be difficult and its an entirely human thing to do to make admin mistakes. I would accept that argument but for two things:

1) Were talking about a Visa application required to be made probably weeks, if not months, ahead of the date of travel. This is not a matter of an incorrect filling in of a confusing and complicated form. This is simply a lack of preparation before starting out on a job. I know, full well, that if I were that lax about the jobs I have to attend I’d be the recipient of a class A bollicking and repeat offenses would see me out of a job. Nice being a freelancer who can find a story ‘anywhere’ I suppose?!.

2) You dont seem as willing to extend the ‘human weakness’ solicitude to the Immigration staff at LAX. For me this is everything I’m disputing with you, Souris and the others. You have your minds set with a certain image of the US and, rather than see this issue for what it most likely is – a few bad apples in LAX Immigration, you latch onto it to reinforce your viewpoint even before you accept that you only have one, naturally biased, side being reported.

We all know that government officials and their minnions never make mistakes so it must be the reporters – BUT the reporters that are making this mistake all seem to be going to Los Angeles.

Flood I scarcely believe you wrote this?!. We also all know that all journalists are paragons of virtue and adhere to the strictest personal codes of ethics dont we?. What was the name of the BBC reporter who got sacked over the David Kelly affair for ‘sexing-up’ a single-angle report. Didnt the Daily Mirror just lose an editor over evil British troops torturing people?. Your faith in the media is strong, sir, and suprising for one of your intelligence.

How many airports accept international flights coming into the USA? Loads? Several dozens? Are you telling me that only 13 reporters failed to fill in a form properly or is it more, much more, believable that this particular form is incorrectly filled in frequently but either it is not discovered (red faces amongst the immigration nazis) or other immigration officials see it for the ancient history that it is and decide to ignore it

Seeing this is a Visa that you are actually issued with, she says she’s got one now!, I’d guess its fairly simple to know whether you’ve got the forms filled out right or not by the fact that a Visa lands on you doorstep or not. If you dont have one you dont fly to the States and tell them you are intending to work as a journalist. If you’re a bit sneaky, and a lot more switched-on than this silly bint, you actually read your visa waiver form and, if you’ve goofed and forgotten the right visa, realise that you can tell Immigration that your not there to work and walk merrily past them. Hmmm I wonder if this could have happened once or twice. Then again though, in your view Flood, journalists never lie do they?.

Just tell me that you didn’t believe one single word that she wrote; tell me that everything she said was a lie.

I dont doubt that she was treated roughly. I do doubt the picture she’s painted that she was entirely meek and inoffensive the whole way through – her writing style is quite sarcastic and aggressive, so, it is my belief she’s got up somebody’s nose at the airport and paid the price for it, but, that is largely irrelevant.

What is at issue here is the connection that is being attmpted to be made between an event that has, at most, been a minor irritant at Customs at a couple US airports and official US foreign and domestic policy?. Where is that connection?. What has the inappropriate actions of a handful of people in Los Angeles got to do with Washington policymakers?. That linkage is so tenuous that it defies belief, unless of course, you want to see it because it supports your preconceived views and that, simply, isnt very honest is it?.

Souris,

As I clearly stated Lappin is but one manifestation of the current Govts policies, another I guess is the lamentable behaviour of other representatives of the US Govt in Iraqi prisons.

How is the treatment Lappin received a manifestation of anything other than poor treatment by a group of Customs types in LA?. How is the Iraqi prison scandal indicative of US government policy?. You’ve said you don’t like the incumbent US administration but that doesnt mean they are immediately responsible for every misdeed performed by an American citizen to you does it? How fair is that?.

I think underneath that you know as well as I do that the US has shifted dramatically to the right

Dont agree with that at all!. I used to get over there a few times a year for business and to see in-laws up until the end of last year and I saw changes in security after 9/11. To be honest with you though Souris, as I said earlier, I’ve had more difficulty getting into Belfast City airport than Newark or anywhere else I’ve flown to in the US!. I also remember the way London was closed down during one of the IRA mainland bombing campaigns in the late 80’s. It was a lot more draconian than anything the yanks have tried yet!.

Other than that I think this is a case of misperception stemming from the domestic-first policies that Clinton favoured. Under the Clinton administration the US was, to a degree, quite quiet on the international stage. Now, with an event like 9/11 as catalyst, the US asserting itself like it did during the Cold War years. Essentially its little more right wing that it was in the late 80’s/early 90’s but its more visible now because its taking the positions that make it stand out.

Either way though this has made for an interesting debate!.

Pluto

a friend of mine refused to sleep with some drug-addict bimbo a few years ago, she beat the hell out of herself, and called the cops. a half dozen cops came in, soo upset that my friend hurt this woman, that they cuffed him to a lamp pole and beat him–without even giving it a second thought.

Oh hell now you’ve done it pal – cruelty to lamp posts – thats going to set them all off again! :rolleyes: