User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 11:46:45 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Do people here not understand war or something? In war... the assets of the person attacking you are generally legit targets... Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The ship was a completely legitimate target, and reasonable action for Ukraine. But that said I also was concerned about the reaction from Russia when I saw this. I get his point. I'm not even saying they shouldn't have done it, but it might have consequences. That is all I think you can assume from his post. Then again if they are trying to play it off as an accidental fire and not an attack from missiles maybe they'll shrug it off to avoid the embarrassment of admitting what happened. A lot of handwringing around here. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 11:49:17 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That would depend on the missile warhead size and type, and the attack profile, and where exactly it hit. Modern ASMs aren't built to hit 18 inch hardened cemented armor such as the conning tower of an Iowa class and still function. Similar story for the belt and face of the turrets. Superstructure, anywhere not in the armored citidel, and to a lesser degree the decks, tops and sides of turrets are more vulnerable, and things like optics, antennas are still fragile. Short answer is an Iowa is probably the most resistant exisitng hull against ASMs but I still wouldn't volunteer to get hit by one. Still could get a mobility kill, firepower kill, or mission kill on it. They could probably shrug off an Exocet, but a Shipwreck might be another kettle of fish. Good assessment. And one thing U.S. warships seemed to always prioritize during the modern era was structural integrity to withstand punishment and fire suppression when struck by an enemy. During WWII that was a lesson not learned by the Japanese carriers vs. U.S. carriers...as well as most combat ships in the Pacific war. Even our destroyers when hit by kamikazis had an amazing survival rate back then. On this Russian missle cruiser, having those missiles in tubes out on the deck seems a bit vulnerable to me. I don't know how volatile those missiles are when hit by some kind of ordnance, but I notice in all the pics of U.S. missile cruisers I see, the missiles appear to be below deck. Any naval guys know how that shakes out? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 11:50:48 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Are they not doing that now ??? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: It could be bad. The Russians could start indiscriminately shelling cities, killing civilians, and raping the population. Are they not doing that now ??? That's the joke. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 12:13:59 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Why no pictures? Someone should be able and willing to confirm definitively whether it has sunk or not. That might be going a little far. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 12:16:15 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryThey "have" a "carrier" is kind of like saying they have a space shuttle. They do...but the hanger it is in collapsed on it 2 decades ago and it's currently in another country. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 12:17:46 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c9/Project_1164_Moskva_2009_G1.jpg/1024px-Project_1164_Moskva_2009_G1.jpg Moskva (Formerly the SLAVA), is the Cruiser that demanded the Ukrainian Snake Island Garrison surrender - that then received the Fuck You reply back... Now they received something more than just some "Harsh Language" ...  LOL!!!BIGGER_HAMMER  Cool looking ship though, ngl. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 12:17:55 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I mean it's one thing to provide a non nato member with ISR and targeting data on the sly....it's another to take pictures of the strike and publish them. That might be going a little far. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Why no pictures? Someone should be able and willing to confirm definitively whether it has sunk or not. That might be going a little far. Agreed. Currently we have "Plausible Deniability" to having given any overt assistance to the Ukrainians in the strike against the Moskva.  BIGGER_HAMMER
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 12:18:55 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Two RC-135V's at once is pretty common the last month in the area. The British have one too joining in. Plus there is an E=8C from time to time. What is not so usual is that there is a Boeing WC-135 Constant Phoenix airborne over the UK now. I've seen the new G-5 based rivets up too, they like altitude. Those crews are certainly getting lots of hours lately. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 12:19:22 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Good assessment. And one thing U.S. warships seemed to always prioritize during the modern era was structural integrity to withstand punishment and fire suppression when struck by an enemy. During WWII that was a lesson not learned by the Japanese carriers vs. U.S. carriers...as well as most combat ships in the Pacific war. Even our destroyers when hit by kamikazis had an amazing survival rate back then. On this Russian missle cruiser, having those missiles in tubes out on the deck seems a bit vulnerable to me. I don't know how volatile those missiles are when hit by some kind of ordnance, but I notice in all the pics of U.S. missile cruisers I see, the missiles appear to be below deck. Any naval guys know how that shakes out? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: That would depend on the missile warhead size and type, and the attack profile, and where exactly it hit. Modern ASMs aren't built to hit 18 inch hardened cemented armor such as the conning tower of an Iowa class and still function. Similar story for the belt and face of the turrets. Superstructure, anywhere not in the armored citidel, and to a lesser degree the decks, tops and sides of turrets are more vulnerable, and things like optics, antennas are still fragile. Short answer is an Iowa is probably the most resistant exisitng hull against ASMs but I still wouldn't volunteer to get hit by one. Still could get a mobility kill, firepower kill, or mission kill on it. They could probably shrug off an Exocet, but a Shipwreck might be another kettle of fish. Good assessment. And one thing U.S. warships seemed to always prioritize during the modern era was structural integrity to withstand punishment and fire suppression when struck by an enemy. During WWII that was a lesson not learned by the Japanese carriers vs. U.S. carriers...as well as most combat ships in the Pacific war. Even our destroyers when hit by kamikazis had an amazing survival rate back then. On this Russian missle cruiser, having those missiles in tubes out on the deck seems a bit vulnerable to me. I don't know how volatile those missiles are when hit by some kind of ordnance, but I notice in all the pics of U.S. missile cruisers I see, the missiles appear to be below deck. Any naval guys know how that shakes out? The Russian and the old Soviet Union’s ships had such low A-sub-Os that they had to pack them with so many weapons they could compensate for ones that did not work. The ship class is an older design and when it was originally made, the only solution they had for ship killing missiles to conduct battle-group take downs was to basically make develop pilotless kamikazies which meant really big missiles which required large launch containers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 12:20:57 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Float anomaly |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 12:22:22 PM EDT
[#11]
The idea that a Russian flag ship missile cruiser has to send an SOS via Morse code on HF is ridiculous.
I call bull shit, but if true then the Russian military is more of a joke than I suspected. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 12:25:18 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That's the joke. I know. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 12:26:19 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The idea that a Russian flag ship missile cruiser has to send an SOS via Morse code on HF is ridiculous. I call bull shit, but if true then the Russian military is more of a joke than I suspected. I think the Russians saw the first gulf war and decided then and there that conventional warfare wasn't worth the rubles. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 12:26:26 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: There just happened to be an NATO surveillance plane in the area... https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/114465/resources__1__jpg-2347945_jpeg-2348126.JPG Has been since the beginning of the war. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 12:29:03 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The idea that a Russian flag ship missile cruiser has to send an SOS via Morse code on HF is ridiculous. I call bull shit, but if true then the Russian military is more of a joke than I suspected. Shock effect probably knocked out some of their communicates and that is probably their secondary or tertiary. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 12:30:23 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I would have thought that all the ground units would have something similar to SINCGARS too but there were fairly credible (I think) audio of russian troops using clear voice radio. I think the Russians saw the first gulf war and decided then and there that conventional warfare wasn't worth the rubles. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The idea that a Russian flag ship missile cruiser has to send an SOS via Morse code on HF is ridiculous. I call bull shit, but if true then the Russian military is more of a joke than I suspected. I think the Russians saw the first gulf war and decided then and there that conventional warfare wasn't worth the rubles. Software definable radios has made SINCGARS type radios obsolete. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 12:35:40 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I would have thought that all the ground units would have something similar to SINCGARS too but there were fairly credible (I think) audio of russian troops using clear voice radio. I think the Russians saw the first gulf war and decided then and there that conventional warfare wasn't worth the rubles. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The idea that a Russian flag ship missile cruiser has to send an SOS via Morse code on HF is ridiculous. I call bull shit, but if true then the Russian military is more of a joke than I suspected. I think the Russians saw the first gulf war and decided then and there that conventional warfare wasn't worth the rubles. Very possible. I gave a tour and static display of an F15 to a bunch of Russian generals after the first gulf war. I talked to the supreme commander of Russian strategic air forces and he confided in me that they were all shocked to see CNN news showing our precision capability in hitting ground targets, specific doors and windows, they had no idea we had that capability and were so far ahead of Russian capability, and they were very glad they never went to war with us in Europe because the US would have slaughtered Soviet forces Don’t know if he was being truthful, but that is what he personally told me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 12:36:50 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: They "have" a "carrier" is kind of like saying they have a space shuttle. They do...but the hanger it is in collapsed on it 2 decades ago and it's currently in another country. It's a giant piece of shit. If burns some heavy residual tars left over from the refinery process, it's what we would call Bunker C Oil but way worse. Its basically toxic sludge left over from one of their refineries. It is drydock for repairs and I doubt the have they money to get it operational again.  Edit: Second image was Fake News... Russia STRONK. (cough, cough) |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 12:37:33 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Software definable radios has made SINCGARS type radios obsolete. Regardless, a military operating at any reasonable level of competence has had encrypted comms for...decades. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 12:41:04 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's a giant piece of shit. If burns some heavy residual tars left over from the refinery process, it's what we would call Bunker C Oil but way worse. Its basically toxic sludge left over from one of their refineries. It is drydock for repairs and I doubt the have they money to get it operational again. https://thebarentsobserver.com/sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/kuzze_in_smoke.jpeg?itok=7Y1z-j6T https://external-preview.redd.it/09Z95r-HOmVI3pcb_5agQQPaNl62WGUA2zSNn3liE4U.png?auto=webp&s=85c13928fd82af3b6b7ed14ec6f7bd5f4f086e18 Russia STRONK. (cough, cough) |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 12:42:23 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: On this Russian missle cruiser, having those missiles in tubes out on the deck seems a bit vulnerable to me. I'd rather have them blow up there than In a confined compartment partially below the water line! The open sky is a place for some of the explosive forces to go other than through a deck, bulkhead, or hull plate. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 12:43:15 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: There are 2 rivets up right now. I've not seen that before. One just on the coast of Romania and one looking at kaliningrad. E-3s up too. I think those assets are the most important thing NATO is doing for Ukraine. Doesn't matter what weapons you have if you can't target them. Early in the start it was not uncommon to see a rivet joint (how does iPhone want to change that to robot???  ) to the north and one to the south by the Black Sea. One USAF and one RAF. And then some awacs and a JSTARS. Looks like the one in the south is heading home now Either they keep a lower profile with the night relief flights, or the orcs don’t fight much at night. So they give it a break as the sun goes down over there. Global hawk didn’t show back up from what I could tell. Maybe stilll way up there watching. Hoping that ship rolls over it it hasn’t yet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 12:46:45 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's a giant piece of shit. If burns some heavy residual tars left over from the refinery process, it's what we would call Bunker C Oil but way worse. Its basically toxic sludge left over from one of their refineries. It is drydock for repairs and I doubt the have they money to get it operational again. https://thebarentsobserver.com/sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/kuzze_in_smoke.jpeg?itok=7Y1z-j6T https://external-preview.redd.it/09Z95r-HOmVI3pcb_5agQQPaNl62WGUA2zSNn3liE4U.png?auto=webp&s=85c13928fd82af3b6b7ed14ec6f7bd5f4f086e18 Russia STRONK. (cough, cough) I believe that second picture is a fake photoshop. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 12:47:13 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's a giant piece of shit. If burns some heavy residual tars left over from the refinery process, it's what we would call Bunker C Oil but way worse. Its basically toxic sludge left over from one of their refineries. It is drydock for repairs and I doubt the have they money to get it operational again. https://thebarentsobserver.com/sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/kuzze_in_smoke.jpeg?itok=7Y1z-j6T https://external-preview.redd.it/09Z95r-HOmVI3pcb_5agQQPaNl62WGUA2zSNn3liE4U.png?auto=webp&s=85c13928fd82af3b6b7ed14ec6f7bd5f4f086e18 Russia STRONK. (cough, cough) Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: They "have" a "carrier" is kind of like saying they have a space shuttle. They do...but the hanger it is in collapsed on it 2 decades ago and it's currently in another country. It's a giant piece of shit. If burns some heavy residual tars left over from the refinery process, it's what we would call Bunker C Oil but way worse. Its basically toxic sludge left over from one of their refineries. It is drydock for repairs and I doubt the have they money to get it operational again. https://thebarentsobserver.com/sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/kuzze_in_smoke.jpeg?itok=7Y1z-j6T https://external-preview.redd.it/09Z95r-HOmVI3pcb_5agQQPaNl62WGUA2zSNn3liE4U.png?auto=webp&s=85c13928fd82af3b6b7ed14ec6f7bd5f4f086e18 Russia STRONK. (cough, cough) Is feature, comrade. Big carrier make own smoke screen, for sneak up and make surprise attack on unsuspecting dogface! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 12:48:58 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Early in the start it was not uncommon to see a rivet joint (how does iPhone want to change that to robot??? ) to the north and one to the south by the Black Sea. One USAF and one RAF. And then some awacs and a JSTARS. Looks like the one in the south is heading home now Either they keep a lower profile with the night relief flights, or the orcs don't fight much at night. So they give it a break as the sun goes down over there. Global hawk didn't show back up from what I could tell. Maybe stilll way up there watching. Hoping that ship rolls over it it hasn't yet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 12:50:47 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's a giant piece of shit. If burns some heavy residual tars left over from the refinery process, it's what we would call Bunker C Oil but way worse. Its basically toxic sludge left over from one of their refineries. It is drydock for repairs and I doubt the have they money to get it operational again. https://thebarentsobserver.com/sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/kuzze_in_smoke.jpeg?itok=7Y1z-j6T https://external-preview.redd.it/09Z95r-HOmVI3pcb_5agQQPaNl62WGUA2zSNn3liE4U.png?auto=webp&s=85c13928fd82af3b6b7ed14ec6f7bd5f4f086e18 Russia STRONK. (cough, cough) Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: They "have" a "carrier" is kind of like saying they have a space shuttle. They do...but the hanger it is in collapsed on it 2 decades ago and it's currently in another country. It's a giant piece of shit. If burns some heavy residual tars left over from the refinery process, it's what we would call Bunker C Oil but way worse. Its basically toxic sludge left over from one of their refineries. It is drydock for repairs and I doubt the have they money to get it operational again. https://thebarentsobserver.com/sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/kuzze_in_smoke.jpeg?itok=7Y1z-j6T https://external-preview.redd.it/09Z95r-HOmVI3pcb_5agQQPaNl62WGUA2zSNn3liE4U.png?auto=webp&s=85c13928fd82af3b6b7ed14ec6f7bd5f4f086e18 Russia STRONK. (cough, cough) Well the dry dock sunk while it had the carrier in it for repairs, and a crane on the dry dock fell onto the deck when it sank or keeled over. They’re supposed to sink but evenly. It went over bad to one side. Anyways, for the longest time of you looked up google eart or bing satellite maps, and checked out russian ports and shipyards , it seems like there are as many ships on their sides as upright alongside piers/docks. What a shitpile the place is |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 12:50:48 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Very possible. I gave a tour and static display of an F15 to a bunch of Russian generals after the first gulf war. I talked to the supreme commander of Russian strategic air forces and he confided in me that they were all shocked to see CNN news showing our precision capability in hitting ground targets, specific doors and windows, they had no idea we had that capability and were so far ahead of Russian capability, and they were very glad they never went to war with us in Europe because the US would have slaughtered Soviet forces Don’t know if he was being truthful, but that is what he personally told me. I had a similar experience showing them our Load Barn at Ramstein. They made comments like: “You are all so professional and look the same. You must all be officers.” It was E5s and below giving the tour. They were also shocked by the cleanliness of the facility and aircraft. They got to look at our training WPNs and asked about those under covers. They didn’t get the covers removed. This was part of a START compliance inspection. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 12:51:20 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's a giant piece of shit. If burns some heavy residual tars left over from the refinery process, it's what we would call Bunker C Oil but way worse. Its basically toxic sludge left over from one of their refineries. It is drydock for repairs and I doubt the have they money to get it operational again. https://thebarentsobserver.com/sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/kuzze_in_smoke.jpeg?itok=7Y1z-j6T https://external-preview.redd.it/09Z95r-HOmVI3pcb_5agQQPaNl62WGUA2zSNn3liE4U.png?auto=webp&s=85c13928fd82af3b6b7ed14ec6f7bd5f4f086e18 Russia STRONK. (cough, cough) Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: They "have" a "carrier" is kind of like saying they have a space shuttle. They do...but the hanger it is in collapsed on it 2 decades ago and it's currently in another country. It's a giant piece of shit. If burns some heavy residual tars left over from the refinery process, it's what we would call Bunker C Oil but way worse. Its basically toxic sludge left over from one of their refineries. It is drydock for repairs and I doubt the have they money to get it operational again. https://thebarentsobserver.com/sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/kuzze_in_smoke.jpeg?itok=7Y1z-j6T https://external-preview.redd.it/09Z95r-HOmVI3pcb_5agQQPaNl62WGUA2zSNn3liE4U.png?auto=webp&s=85c13928fd82af3b6b7ed14ec6f7bd5f4f086e18 Russia STRONK. (cough, cough)  Russian Carrier self generates STRONK directional beacon to aircraftskis to find shipski. Pilots can find way back from many many kilometers away... Also functional wind direction gauge to assist pilots on attempts to land... Much more Robust & combat capable Russian system than effete Americans relying on high tech delicate electronics. BIGGER_HAMMER
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 12:53:05 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I had a similar experience showing them our Load Barn at Ramstein. They made comments like: "You are all so professional and look the same. You must all be officers." It was E5s and below giving the tour. They were also shocked by the cleanliness of the facility and aircraft. They got to look at our training WPNs and asked about those under covers. They didn't get the covers removed. This was part of a START compliance inspection. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 12:54:11 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Good assessment. And one thing U.S. warships seemed to always prioritize during the modern era was structural integrity to withstand punishment and fire suppression when struck by an enemy. During WWII that was a lesson not learned by the Japanese carriers vs. U.S. carriers...as well as most combat ships in the Pacific war. Even our destroyers when hit by kamikazis had an amazing survival rate back then. On this Russian missle cruiser, having those missiles in tubes out on the deck seems a bit vulnerable to me. I don't know how volatile those missiles are when hit by some kind of ordnance, but I notice in all the pics of U.S. missile cruisers I see, the missiles appear to be below deck. Any naval guys know how that shakes out? Never forget the USS Franklin. What a testament to the ship and a valiant crew. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 12:54:19 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Niet comrade, fire extinguished by seawater. Yeah sinking the ship sure put the fire out lol. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 12:58:47 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Good assessment. And one thing U.S. warships seemed to always prioritize during the modern era was structural integrity to withstand punishment and fire suppression when struck by an enemy. During WWII that was a lesson not learned by the Japanese carriers vs. U.S. carriers...as well as most combat ships in the Pacific war. Even our destroyers when hit by kamikazis had an amazing survival rate back then. On this Russian missle cruiser, having those missiles in tubes out on the deck seems a bit vulnerable to me. I don't know how volatile those missiles are when hit by some kind of ordnance, but I notice in all the pics of U.S. missile cruisers I see, the missiles appear to be below deck. Any naval guys know how that shakes out? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 1:01:27 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's a giant piece of shit. If burns some heavy residual tars left over from the refinery process, it's what we would call Bunker C Oil but way worse. Its basically toxic sludge left over from one of their refineries. It is drydock for repairs and I doubt the have they money to get it operational again. https://thebarentsobserver.com/sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/kuzze_in_smoke.jpeg?itok=7Y1z-j6T https://external-preview.redd.it/09Z95r-HOmVI3pcb_5agQQPaNl62WGUA2zSNn3liE4U.png?auto=webp&s=85c13928fd82af3b6b7ed14ec6f7bd5f4f086e18 Russia STRONK. (cough, cough) Looks more like she's burning cheap coal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 1:03:05 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I believe that second picture is a fake photoshop. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: It's a giant piece of shit. If burns some heavy residual tars left over from the refinery process, it's what we would call Bunker C Oil but way worse. Its basically toxic sludge left over from one of their refineries. It is drydock for repairs and I doubt the have they money to get it operational again. https://thebarentsobserver.com/sites/default/files/styles/full_width/public/kuzze_in_smoke.jpeg?itok=7Y1z-j6T https://external-preview.redd.it/09Z95r-HOmVI3pcb_5agQQPaNl62WGUA2zSNn3liE4U.png?auto=webp&s=85c13928fd82af3b6b7ed14ec6f7bd5f4f086e18 Russia STRONK. (cough, cough) I believe that second picture is a fake photoshop. Yep, photoshop of the Deep Water Horizon fire. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 1:03:30 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Looks more like she's burning cheap coal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 1:07:37 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
m |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 1:09:17 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Didn't it catch fire and sink in the dry dock? Also a couple years back it caught fire and they had trouble putting it out, so they sunk it intentionally to extinguish the fire. Hard being scared of a military with only one carrier, that is basically a prison sentence for its crew. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 1:09:31 PM EDT
[#38]
UPDATED: Pentagon Says Damaged Russian Navy Cruiser Underway Toward Black Sea Homeport
https://news.usni.org/2022/04/13/russian-navy-confirms-severe-damage-to-black-sea-cruiser-moskva-crew-abandoned-ship |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 1:10:08 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Modern warships aren't really armored anymore. Putting the missiles below deck may give some advantage from smaller calibers, but any serious hit, like from a ASM of any size, is likely to punch through and blow up what it hits. I saw images of the construction of a Zumwalt class destroyer posted here some years ago. The hull looked paper thin. Like some kid with a BB gun could punch through it. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 1:11:54 PM EDT
[#40]
Dupe.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 1:12:20 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I had a similar experience showing them our Load Barn at Ramstein. They made comments like: “You are all so professional and look the same. You must all be officers.” It was E5s and below giving the tour. They were also shocked by the cleanliness of the facility and aircraft. They got to look at our training WPNs and asked about those under covers. They didn’t get the covers removed. This was part of a START compliance inspection. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Very possible. I gave a tour and static display of an F15 to a bunch of Russian generals after the first gulf war. I talked to the supreme commander of Russian strategic air forces and he confided in me that they were all shocked to see CNN news showing our precision capability in hitting ground targets, specific doors and windows, they had no idea we had that capability and were so far ahead of Russian capability, and they were very glad they never went to war with us in Europe because the US would have slaughtered Soviet forces Don’t know if he was being truthful, but that is what he personally told me. I had a similar experience showing them our Load Barn at Ramstein. They made comments like: “You are all so professional and look the same. You must all be officers.” It was E5s and below giving the tour. They were also shocked by the cleanliness of the facility and aircraft. They got to look at our training WPNs and asked about those under covers. They didn’t get the covers removed. This was part of a START compliance inspection. Doesn’t surprise me at all. In the mid 1980s as a young fighter pilot who got to sit in some of their fighters, it quickly became apparent at how much their top of the line equipment was pure dogshit. If was nice to know if I ever faced Russian equipment and Russian pilots based on their known policies, the odds were very heavily stacked in my favor. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 1:14:24 PM EDT
[#42]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 1:17:26 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Doesn’t surprise me at all. In the mid 1980s as a young fighter pilot who got to sit in some of their fighters, it quickly became apparent at how much their top of the line equipment was pure dogshit. If was nice to know if I ever faced Russian equipment and Russian pilots based on their known policies, the odds were very heavily stacked in my favor. All the rough edges really grabs ones attention.  Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 1:26:54 PM EDT
[#44]
All it takes is one stupid mistake to fuck shit up. Remember the McCain Forrestal thing. One small errant missile caught everyone with their pants down.
Everyone could have been on a tea break thinking the dumbass Ukrainians couldn't do shit. Someone panics, starts a small fire which suddenly gets out of control. Any one of a million scenarios, where the damn thing catches fire and explodes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 1:28:21 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Good assessment. And one thing U.S. warships seemed to always prioritize during the modern era was structural integrity to withstand punishment and fire suppression when struck by an enemy. During WWII that was a lesson not learned by the Japanese carriers vs. U.S. carriers...as well as most combat ships in the Pacific war. Even our destroyers when hit by kamikazis had an amazing survival rate back then. On this Russian missle cruiser, having those missiles in tubes out on the deck seems a bit vulnerable to me. I don't know how volatile those missiles are when hit by some kind of ordnance, but I notice in all the pics of U.S. missile cruisers I see, the missiles appear to be below deck. Any naval guys know how that shakes out? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: That would depend on the missile warhead size and type, and the attack profile, and where exactly it hit. Modern ASMs aren't built to hit 18 inch hardened cemented armor such as the conning tower of an Iowa class and still function. Similar story for the belt and face of the turrets. Superstructure, anywhere not in the armored citidel, and to a lesser degree the decks, tops and sides of turrets are more vulnerable, and things like optics, antennas are still fragile. Short answer is an Iowa is probably the most resistant exisitng hull against ASMs but I still wouldn't volunteer to get hit by one. Still could get a mobility kill, firepower kill, or mission kill on it. They could probably shrug off an Exocet, but a Shipwreck might be another kettle of fish. Good assessment. And one thing U.S. warships seemed to always prioritize during the modern era was structural integrity to withstand punishment and fire suppression when struck by an enemy. During WWII that was a lesson not learned by the Japanese carriers vs. U.S. carriers...as well as most combat ships in the Pacific war. Even our destroyers when hit by kamikazis had an amazing survival rate back then. On this Russian missle cruiser, having those missiles in tubes out on the deck seems a bit vulnerable to me. I don't know how volatile those missiles are when hit by some kind of ordnance, but I notice in all the pics of U.S. missile cruisers I see, the missiles appear to be below deck. Any naval guys know how that shakes out? Some of our WWII destroyers took an amazing amount of punishment. U.S.S. Aaron Ward  Attached File1 Near miss crash. Engine and propeller hit Mt. 3. 2 ZEKE hit Mt. 44. 2B Bomb blew out side after engineroom. 3 Near miss crash damaged rigging and No. 1 stack. 4 VAL hit main deck, frame 81. 4B Near miss bomb blew in side forward fireroom. 5 VAL crashed deckhouse, frame 90. 6 Plane hit after stack. 6B Bomb detonated in after uptakes. This Saturday April 16th marks the 77th anniversary of the ordeal of the U.S.S. Laffey, "The Ship That Wouldn't Die." During the 80-minute attack, Laffey had shot down at least eight aircraft and damaged the six kamikaze that hit her. Moreover, she had been damaged by four direct bombs hits (plus bombs carried by the kamikaze). Laffey’s heroic crew suffered 32 dead and 71 (or 72) wounded. “No! I’ll never abandon ship as long as a single gun will fire!” —Commander Frederick J. Becton, commanding officer, USS Laffey (DD-724), 16 April 1945 https://www.history.navy.mil/about-us/leadership/director/directors-corner/h-grams/h-gram-045/h-045-1.html#:~:text=During%20the%2080%2Dminute%20attack,71%20 |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 1:29:03 PM EDT
[#46]
I am disappointed that the ship hasn't sunk yet.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 1:29:23 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: From Reddit Russian ship intercepted Ukrainian missiles, Russia confirms the missiles were destroyed on impact! |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 1:32:18 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well the dry dock sunk while it had the carrier in it for repairs, and a crane on the dry dock fell onto the deck when it sank or keeled over. They’re supposed to sink but evenly. It went over bad to one side. Anyways, for the longest time of you looked up google eart or bing satellite maps, and checked out russian ports and shipyards , it seems like there are as many ships on their sides as upright alongside piers/docks. What a shitpile the place is Well, communism and socialism are just excuses for a ruling class to loot an entire country. When everyone is corrupt as fuck and spend all their time stealing public resources to line their own pockets, it makes sense that their military expenditures would basically be wasted. They've made a good living selling second rate equipment to dictators who need to oppress the locals and keep their neighbors at bay, but it seems like the reality of the russian military and their equipment is a far cry from their hype. The real question is whether the chinese are similarly crappy or if they've been able to produce functional copies of western equipment. Or if they know what to do with it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 1:32:55 PM EDT
[#49]
so who called the hit on the russian ship first,did ukraine say yea we hit a ship or russia admit to an accident on board first????
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 1:34:18 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Didn't it catch fire and sink in the dry dock? It's a biscuit. it's dead Jim. It has as much chance of sailing again under it's own power as the Buran has of reaching orbit...probably less. Yeah, they might mount the Buran on the turret of a T-72. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
