Originally posted by gunnut
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Littoral Combat Ships
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by desertswo View PostMy "appreciation" of both was simple . . . they'd better get in the first lick,
Follow up question, how capable were they of getting in the first lick, I mean, how capable were their officers? Follow up question, did they know they were a kamakazi force?Chimo
Comment
-
Originally posted by Monash View PostThis raises a point I've been curious about for a while i.e damage control in a modern naval engagement. The only experience I can think of that even loosely equates is the Falklands War where the chief (public) lesson - apart from never build warship hulls or superstructures using aluminum alloy was that against frigate size hulls 'one shot' kills were to be expected i.e. the damage caused by modern anti-ship combined with modern ship designs meant 'damage control' was limited to fighting the fires long enough for the crew to abandon ship.
So take say an AB class destroyer which gets hit by 2 harpoons in a narrow space of time (minutes), damage control is fully manned and operational at the time and both hits are roughly mid-ship, one near the waterline and one in the superstructure. So for we laymen exactly how the hell do you 'damage control 440 kilos of HE going off inside a modern warship?
Comment
-
-
The Sprucans did take a beating in the various Sinkex evolutions. Keeping in mind that they were stripped, doors and hatches opened, not maneuvering or fighting back or doing any kind of damage control. Torpedoes always seemed to do the most damage though because they actually broke the ship.
Comment
-
Originally posted by DonBelt View PostThe Sprucans did take a beating in the various Sinkex evolutions. Keeping in mind that they were stripped, doors and hatches opened, not maneuvering or fighting back or doing any kind of damage control. Torpedoes always seemed to do the most damage though because they actually broke the ship.
And Monash, the RN ships in the Falklands Campaign are not a good example of what can be done DC-wise. Bad design, and even worse execution of the design, and let's just say DC teams that were not as well versed in the concepts as an American crew of the same period. I know, because I trained a bunch of RN personnel as an instructor at SWOSCOLCOM Det Coronado in the aftermath of that war. We were "training the trainers" in how we do business . . . they have since come to Jesus on the issue and can take multiple hits and live.
Comment
-
Originally posted by desertswo View PostHowever, Cole received damage on par with two MK-48 hits (as a CAT watch supervisor in the NMCC during that incident I was privy to a whole lot of photography and video that the rest of the world has never seen. Believe me when I tell you that if ever one of our ships was going to sink, that was the one that should have). They broke her back and exceeded the floodable length of the ship AND SAVED HER WITH A FREAKING BUCKET BRIGADE!!! I've never been so proud to be a member of the DC world as I was then, because they validated everything I ever learned and/or passed on.
Or maybe just point me to some open sources on some of what DC ops/training entails.
Tankersteve
Comment
-
Originally posted by surfgun View PostIt just puzzles me how the destructive power of two Mk-48's could be packaged upon a zodiac? Was it some ultra upscale large zodiac? I take it that must have used some sort of shaped charge, but still that was a very impressive result.
What do we know about the "small boat" used in the Cole attack...was it a Zodiac or something larger?“He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”
Comment
-
Originally posted by surfgun View PostIt just puzzles me how the destructive power of two Mk-48's could be packaged upon a zodiac? Was it some ultra upscale large zodiac? I take it that must have used some sort of shaped charge, but still that was a very impressive result.
I don't care how thick your ship hull is, there is several billion pounds of seawater. A weapon that can cause a single crack, even half an inch is going to sink it ... if your DC can't get to it in time.Chimo
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tankersteve View PostDesertSWO, anything unclassified that you can expand on there? Compare to your understanding of manning requirements and the basic capabilities needed to conduct certain tasks? I don't believe the Perry's were considered a robust design when they first appeared, but I think they were at least built to the same standards of survivability as the rest of the fleet of comparable size. I'm sure there is much you can't or don't want to speak of, to say nothing of commenting specifically on an LCS's DC capability, but for those of us not familiar with these operations, a bit more would be enlightening.
Or maybe just point me to some open sources on some of what DC ops/training entails.
Tankersteve
DC is, by its very nature labor intensive. As a young Ensign I owned Repair Locker Number Two in Constellation. That covered the forward third of the ship, main deck and below (including the magazines containing those weapons, the existence we could neither confirm nor deny). I had 150 MEN assigned to me. There were eight repair lockers in all, each with the same or higher manning. So roughly 25% or more of a compliment of 5000 was dedicated to DC. For the gentlemen here who spent their service lives humping 90 pound rucks 20 miles in a day, I have the greatest respect; so let me put main engineering space fire fighting into a context that will make some sense to you. Fire and flushing main pressure is maintained anywhere between 90 and 160 PSI; so take that 90 pound ruck, and the M-4 you've been humping off of your backs and hold it at waist level and then swing it back and forth for five minutes (understanding that according to Mr. Newton, for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, that 90 PSI is pushing you backwards, never mind the weight of the water in that 2 and 1/2 inch hose), keeping in mind that you are wearing a Nomex flame resistant suit, Scott Air Pack, and the ambient temperature in the space may be approaching 300 degrees and you aren't anywhere near the fire . . . yet. Leave the danger aspect out of it, it's just plain exhausting work, and it requires multiple teams in order to do it, because you probably won't get anywhere near five minutes out of that Number One nozzle man.
Now, someone will try to tell you that there is an automatic this or that to handle all of that, to which I would reply that there is a pony somewhere in this room, so you'd better keep shoveling. And 25% of 65? 16; let me know how that works out for you.
Comment
-
Newton was a reactionist .......
Originally posted by desertswo View Post.......... For the gentlemen here who spent their service lives humping 90 pound rucks 20 miles in a day, I have the greatest respect; so let me put main engineering space fire fighting into a context that will make some sense to you. Fire and flushing main pressure is maintained anywhere between 90 and 160 PSI; so take that 90 pound ruck, and the M-4 you've been humping off of your backs and hold it at waist level and then swing it back and forth for five minutes (understanding that according to Mr. Newton, for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, that 90 PSI is pushing you backwards, never mind the weight of the water in that 2 and 1/2 inch hose), ...........
Comment
-
Originally posted by surfgun View PostFrom what I can gleam the attack boat was 35' in length. In theory a boat of that size would be able to carry a sizable destructive device.
Comment
-
Originally posted by desertswo View PostLast edited by Monash; 06 Aug 15,, 11:51.If you are emotionally invested in 'believing' something is true you have lost the ability to tell if it is true.
Comment
Comment