Mass speed boat attack on USN how effective? - Page 2

Feanor · 01-13-2008, 13:37 PM

What if you sent a large, and loud, seeboat fleet from one side, at night, and from another side quietly sent a few non-radar reflecting quiet-engine craft in? Would that be a more feasible scenario?

BudW · 01-13-2008, 14:12 PM

They would be armed with rpg's, 50 cals,and ak74's, stinger type AA weapons.

**TopHatter** · 01-13-2008, 14:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Feanor

What if you sent a large, and loud, seeboat fleet from one side, at night, and from another side quietly sent a few non-radar reflecting quiet-engine craft in? Would that be a more feasible scenario?

That's assuming the USN ships are all looking in the same direction. And there zero aerial assets backing up the task force.

Remember, if we can think of it here, the USN has probably already thought of it as well.

Which is not to say that human error can't make a scenario possible, but training and doctrine reduce the chances of it happening.

Small gunboats are ultimately limited in what they can do it an underway modern multi-ship task force that knows full well that it's standing into danger (the Persian Gulf) and is therefore undoubtably prepared and armed to the teeth.

omon · 01-13-2008, 14:57 PM

why not use divers?

citanon · 01-13-2008, 15:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by omon

why not use divers?

Against moving ships?

And if you are thinking of attacking anchored ships in the harbor, those are protected by armed seals.

omon · 01-13-2008, 15:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by citanon

Against moving ships?

yes. they too have underwater transport.
we are not talking about moving ships,

omon · 01-13-2008, 15:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by citanon

And if you are thinking of attacking anchored ships in the harbor, those are protected by armed seals.

so? even better, no depth charges,

IDonT · 01-13-2008, 19:27 PM

It is difficult to ram a ship traveling at 33 knots.

Tin Man · 01-13-2008, 20:52 PM

Those speedboats, in an expected attack with good intel`would get reamed, cut to pieces. Way back when, even Sea Sparrow had an anti-surface capability. Remember that tragic incident when a USN CVN hit a Turkish naval vessel with Sea Sparrow, in the `90s. ESSM does it even better.
The only thing that could go wrong is an asymmetric tactic, which isn`t unheard of.....

Bella · 01-14-2008, 00:06 AM

In my opinion, 75-100 speed boats loaded with explosives against a carrier battle group in formation at 30+ knots would get noticed at a distance at night or during the day. I don't know, I'm not no Navy man, but I have experience on boats my whole life on the ocean, and my radar can pick up small boats at a good distance, and when I'm on the tower fishing, I can see for miles. On a Naval vessel with much better radar and that sits much higher on the ocean then my 50' fishing boat, I think they would see them way far off. On top of that, I think when noticed by the Navy, the fleet would launch several helicopters armed with guns that would confront them. Even with the great number of attack boats, the carrier would also launch attack aircraft. I don't know... just my uneducated guess at it.

akinkhoo · 01-14-2008, 06:26 AM

if aegis destroyers group can clear 100 of missiles, what is a 100 slower moving boats to it? :o

imo, this question shouldn't exist. the boat are patrol craft, no one in the right mind will use them in mass attack when there are more powerful weapons available to their use.

with enough eggs, you can kill a person too. but why waste millions of eggs when you got a gun?

**TopHatter** · 01-14-2008, 15:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by akinkhoo

imo, this question shouldn't exist. the boat are patrol craft, no one in the right mind will use them in mass attack when there are more powerful weapons available to their use.

These are the same types of people that strap explosives on their chests and detonate themselves in marketplaces full of women and child.

In other words, they are not in their right mind.

Quote:

Originally Posted by akinkhoo

with enough eggs, you can kill a person too. but why waste millions of eggs when you got a gun?

Because in this case, the "eggs" are cheap.

omon · 01-14-2008, 21:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TopHatter

These are the same types of people that strap explosives on their chests and detonate themselves in marketplaces full of women and child.

In other words, they are not in their right mind.

Because in this case, the "eggs" are cheap.

sorry, no they aren,t, they are different, i have not heard of any iranian suiside bombers (it doesn,t mean there aren,t, but deffinatly not nearly as much as other me countries.) we do have ppl that shot kids in shcool and than kill them selves, does it mean all americans like that?
i have seen news about iran form other than american media, it isn,t what iraq, or palesine, or a-stan are.
they are muslims but not as radical, or may be not as desparate as others.
after all if they were not in their right mind, those 2 boats wouldn,t leave in one piece, but they did.
they also value their life and freedom as much as you, and me.

also freedom is worth dying for.

**Parihaka** · 01-14-2008, 22:24 PM

Hmm, closest real world scenario being kamikaze attacks against allied forces during WWII. Acording to wiki (yeah yeah I know)

Quote:

By the end of World War II, the IJN had sacrificed 2,525 kamikaze pilots, and the IJA had lost 1,387.

The number of ships sunk is a matter of debate. According to a wartime Japanese propaganda announcement, the missions sank 81 ships and damaged 195, and according to a Japanese tally, suicide attacks accounted for up to 80 percent of the U.S. losses in the final phase of the war in the Pacific. In a 2004 book, World War II, the historians Wilmott, Cross & Messenger stated that more than 70 U.S. vessels were "sunk or damaged beyond repair" by kamikazes.

Official US sources put the toll much lower. According to a U.S. Air Force webpage:

Approximately 2,800 Kamikaze attackers sunk 34 Navy ships, damaged 368 others, killed 4,900 sailors, and wounded over 4,800. Despite radar detection and cuing, airborne interception and attrition, and massive anti-aircraft barrages, a distressing 14 percent of Kamikazes survived to score a hit on a ship; nearly 8.5 percent of all ships hit by Kamikazes sank.[19]

Australian journalists Denis and Peggy Warner, in a 1982 book with Japanese naval historian Seno Sadao (The Sacred Warriors: Japan’s Suicide Legions), arrived at a total of 57 ships sunk by kamikazes. However, Bill Gordon, a US Japanologist who specialises in kamikazes, states in a 2007 article that 49 ships were sunk by kamikaze aircraft.[20] Gordon says that the Warners and Sadao included eight ships that did not sink.

So, roughly 14% success rate by aircraft traveling roughly 287 knots, against WWII defence systems.
Now compare a top speed for their speedboats of what, 40 knots? 50 knots? against a modern navy?

Shark bait.

omon · 01-14-2008, 22:38 PM

^^^would they be more effective if they flew straight down?

01-13-2008, 14:57 PM	#19 (permalink)
omon Field mechanik *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 11-01-06 Location: bk Posts: 1,925 Country:	why not use divers? __________________ "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!" B. Franklin

01-13-2008, 20:52 PM	#24 (permalink)
Tin Man Contributor Join Date: 06-02-07 Location: In the `shires. Posts: 396 Country:	Those speedboats, in an expected attack with good intel`would get reamed, cut to pieces. Way back when, even Sea Sparrow had an anti-surface capability. Remember that tragic incident when a USN CVN hit a Turkish naval vessel with Sea Sparrow, in the `90s. ESSM does it even better. The only thing that could go wrong is an asymmetric tactic, which isn`t unheard of..... __________________ "Liberty is a thing beyond all price.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Liberals Blame America for Nick Berg's Death	Leader	Political Discussions	43	08-20-2007 04:30 AM
Articles and links for the Military Professional	Officer of Engineers	The Staff College	115	11-20-2006 11:28 AM
Future of afghanistan	raja khan	Operation Enduring Freedom	113	09-20-2004 19:23 PM
Kerry calls on Bush to denounce attack ads	Ironduke	Political Discussions	45	08-29-2004 12:09 PM

01-13-2008, 13:37 PM	#16 (permalink)
Feanor Banished Join Date: 06-12-07 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 2,385 Country:	What if you sent a large, and loud, seeboat fleet from one side, at night, and from another side quietly sent a few non-radar reflecting quiet-engine craft in? Would that be a more feasible scenario?

01-13-2008, 14:12 PM	#17 (permalink)
BudW Patron Join Date: 02-24-07 Posts: 187	They would be armed with rpg's, 50 cals,and ak74's, stinger type AA weapons.

01-13-2008, 19:27 PM	#23 (permalink)
IDonT Patron Join Date: 06-13-06 Posts: 174	It is difficult to ram a ship traveling at 33 knots.

01-14-2008, 00:06 AM	#25 (permalink)
Bella Patron Join Date: 09-03-07 Location: Chicago Posts: 288 Country:	In my opinion, 75-100 speed boats loaded with explosives against a carrier battle group in formation at 30+ knots would get noticed at a distance at night or during the day. I don't know, I'm not no Navy man, but I have experience on boats my whole life on the ocean, and my radar can pick up small boats at a good distance, and when I'm on the tower fishing, I can see for miles. On a Naval vessel with much better radar and that sits much higher on the ocean then my 50' fishing boat, I think they would see them way far off. On top of that, I think when noticed by the Navy, the fleet would launch several helicopters armed with guns that would confront them. Even with the great number of attack boats, the carrier would also launch attack aircraft. I don't know... just my uneducated guess at it.

01-14-2008, 06:26 AM	#26 (permalink)
akinkhoo Regular Join Date: 10-30-07 Posts: 27 Country:	if aegis destroyers group can clear 100 of missiles, what is a 100 slower moving boats to it? :o imo, this question shouldn't exist. the boat are patrol craft, no one in the right mind will use them in mass attack when there are more powerful weapons available to their use. with enough eggs, you can kill a person too. but why waste millions of eggs when you got a gun?

01-14-2008, 22:38 PM	#30 (permalink)
omon Field mechanik *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 11-01-06 Location: bk Posts: 1,925 Country:	^^^would they be more effective if they flew straight down?

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)