F-16s and AH-1Ws failed to sink ship
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vienna
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What would happen if this ship is:
1. makeing evasive maneuvers
2. firing back
3. part of a Chinese (mainland) task force to attack Taiwan
Not much sense of having armed forces...
Bernhard
1. makeing evasive maneuvers
2. firing back
3. part of a Chinese (mainland) task force to attack Taiwan
Not much sense of having armed forces...
Bernhard
Guest
Posts: n/a
Think it's been done before
quote:
What would happen if this ship is:
1. makeing evasive maneuvers
2. firing back
3. part of a Chinese (mainland) task force to attack Taiwan
Not much sense of having armed forces...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fairly sure that ships have been sunk/disabled while performing your stated conditions from aircraft before. Just betting that the same would happen again...............
Upon checking my facts, guess condition 3 hasn't actually occurred.
What would happen if this ship is:
1. makeing evasive maneuvers
2. firing back
3. part of a Chinese (mainland) task force to attack Taiwan
Not much sense of having armed forces...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fairly sure that ships have been sunk/disabled while performing your stated conditions from aircraft before. Just betting that the same would happen again...............
Upon checking my facts, guess condition 3 hasn't actually occurred.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As an Aussie, we're genetically pre-disposed to offending everyone (all in the name of taking the pi.ss of course!) so I have no hesitation at all in announcing that the only time I've ever heard an American called a 'spam' is when he/she is behaving especially spastic-like...hence:
SPastic AMerican.
It doesn't get much play down here, my lot seem to prefer to use the word Seppo.
So "Peace Out", my Septic brothers in arms!
SPastic AMerican.
It doesn't get much play down here, my lot seem to prefer to use the word Seppo.
So "Peace Out", my Septic brothers in arms!
Guest
Posts: n/a
No monopoly on stupidity
quote:
Maybe they should have just got the captain drunk and sailed it up a fjord...or whatever they call them in Alaska
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Or just let a boob hit a marked outcropping of rocks like Seven Sisters. Oh, wait, that's already been done.........
Maybe they should have just got the captain drunk and sailed it up a fjord...or whatever they call them in Alaska
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Or just let a boob hit a marked outcropping of rocks like Seven Sisters. Oh, wait, that's already been done.........
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes
on
16 Posts
I believe the term 'spam' when used in the context of Americans comes from WW2.
When the US were initially asked for assistance by the UK they were worried about being seen as on the side of either power, so as well as profiteering from German slave labour and providing power plants for German trucks the US also supplied the UK with food aid. One of the main items was 'Spam, the ham in a can'.
Of course in way of thanks Britain gave the US all the intelligence it had on the Japanese threat, which was duly ignored and as a consequence they had their bottoms spanked by an Asian foe they saw as 'inferior'.
When the US were initially asked for assistance by the UK they were worried about being seen as on the side of either power, so as well as profiteering from German slave labour and providing power plants for German trucks the US also supplied the UK with food aid. One of the main items was 'Spam, the ham in a can'.
Of course in way of thanks Britain gave the US all the intelligence it had on the Japanese threat, which was duly ignored and as a consequence they had their bottoms spanked by an Asian foe they saw as 'inferior'.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Lowlevel UK
Posts: 316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hang on MarkD and Brick-H. If we try some 'effects', this tub was beyond fighting (well conducting its main task). It had stopped moving and, while technically afloat, was upside down. This wasn't a target for military weapons, it was a navigational hazard. A freighter carrying benzene to modern standards will have multiple compartments and a double skinned hull with fuel between the skins. Terrorist attacks on tankers in the Gulf demonstrated how difficult they are to sink. Whoever suggested that lobbing bombs or Hellfires at it wasn't being much of an expert. A torpedo would have had more success.
Guest
Posts: n/a
An agreement and a WTFO?
Data-lynx,
I agree with you.
My point to N5528P's seemingly anti-military post was that ships HAVE been sunk before from aircraft. Even if Taiwan muffed sinking this derelict, ships definitely face a threat from aircraft attack and therefore, maybe there is a reason for having a military.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To Helpful Stacker,
Hmmm, perhaps a bit of anti-American bias in your post's facts?
Sure, the US traded with Germany for far too long, but we did start escorting convoys way out into the Atlantic and lost several of our own destroyers before we got into the fray, as well as a few other good things.
And we did get our bottoms 'spanked,' with a sneak attack (not sure the UK gave us the intel on that one - thought you guys had the German codes and we did the Japanese, but I am not a SIGINT historian...)
Oh, and was it then better to get spanked with full knowledge of a war like happened in Singapore, the sinking of Repulse and Prince of Wales, etc, etc?
My apologies to those who either fought or had family who did for those battles; they were brave men. But the blatant "See how bad/evil/stupid the Yanks always are" wore thin.
Oh, and thanks to the UK for centimetric radar's cavity magnatron, substantial help on the bomb, and lots of other good things to include standing alone until we did get into the fray.
I agree with you.
My point to N5528P's seemingly anti-military post was that ships HAVE been sunk before from aircraft. Even if Taiwan muffed sinking this derelict, ships definitely face a threat from aircraft attack and therefore, maybe there is a reason for having a military.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To Helpful Stacker,
Hmmm, perhaps a bit of anti-American bias in your post's facts?
Sure, the US traded with Germany for far too long, but we did start escorting convoys way out into the Atlantic and lost several of our own destroyers before we got into the fray, as well as a few other good things.
And we did get our bottoms 'spanked,' with a sneak attack (not sure the UK gave us the intel on that one - thought you guys had the German codes and we did the Japanese, but I am not a SIGINT historian...)
Oh, and was it then better to get spanked with full knowledge of a war like happened in Singapore, the sinking of Repulse and Prince of Wales, etc, etc?
My apologies to those who either fought or had family who did for those battles; they were brave men. But the blatant "See how bad/evil/stupid the Yanks always are" wore thin.
Oh, and thanks to the UK for centimetric radar's cavity magnatron, substantial help on the bomb, and lots of other good things to include standing alone until we did get into the fray.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes
on
16 Posts
But the blatant "See how bad/evil/stupid the Yanks always are" wore thin.
The context of what I stated before is correct. The British government re-payed the aid given by the US with all the intel it had available on the Japanese threat, which was largely ignored by FDR's Director of Communications at the time William J Donovan, a man with a well documented dislike of the British.
As with many of the great moments in history the 'lack' of intel prior to the attacks on Pearl Harbour was down to he attitudes of an individual rather than nation.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Why not military chiefs then?
Helpful,
If it wasn't your intent to slam all Americans all the time, then I apologize. That's how I read your post.
Donovan? Yes, he was no fan of the British, but THE reason why we got caught with our shorts down at Pearl Harbor (never mind the Phillippines the NEXT day!)?! I think not.
Plenty of decision makers in the US chain muffed it and the Japanese pounded our d***s into the mud of Pearl.
(So, have we successfully hijacked this thread or can it be saved?!)
If it wasn't your intent to slam all Americans all the time, then I apologize. That's how I read your post.
Donovan? Yes, he was no fan of the British, but THE reason why we got caught with our shorts down at Pearl Harbor (never mind the Phillippines the NEXT day!)?! I think not.
Plenty of decision makers in the US chain muffed it and the Japanese pounded our d***s into the mud of Pearl.
(So, have we successfully hijacked this thread or can it be saved?!)
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: due south
Posts: 1,332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
brickhistory: A double agent working for the British, code name Tricycle, real name Dusko Popov, went to the US months before Pearl Harbour.
The Germans had asked him, obviously on behalf of the Japanese, to answer a long list of questions about the defences and state of readiness at Pearl Harbour.
This was handed to Hoover on a plate with the assurance of British intel that Tricycle was trustworthy.
But, for some reason Hoover disliked and did not trust Tricycle so never passed on that information.
The Germans had asked him, obviously on behalf of the Japanese, to answer a long list of questions about the defences and state of readiness at Pearl Harbour.
This was handed to Hoover on a plate with the assurance of British intel that Tricycle was trustworthy.
But, for some reason Hoover disliked and did not trust Tricycle so never passed on that information.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Singapore and Pearl Harbour
Interesting parallels!
Within 2 days of the attack on Pearl Harbour, Churchill's answer to the Pacific (he had the 'Europe First' priority correct, I think) the Repulse and Prince of Wales went to the bottom. On the Isle of Singapore, thanks to the lack of vision of Brig Percival, UK soldiers were practicing shooting at targets of German soldiers, not preparing defenses (Like the UK Sapper recommended) and thus got rolled over from Malaya in all of about a month.
'Inadequate planning, little jungle training, poor intelligence, low morale, confused command structure and lack of air cover all contributed to defeat in Malaya. The Japanese were thoroughly prepared determined and used the jungle effectively.'
<http://www.national-army-museum.ac.u.../far-east.html>
Failure of intel? I dont think so... Failure to appreciate the situation. Probably.
Within 2 days of the attack on Pearl Harbour, Churchill's answer to the Pacific (he had the 'Europe First' priority correct, I think) the Repulse and Prince of Wales went to the bottom. On the Isle of Singapore, thanks to the lack of vision of Brig Percival, UK soldiers were practicing shooting at targets of German soldiers, not preparing defenses (Like the UK Sapper recommended) and thus got rolled over from Malaya in all of about a month.
'Inadequate planning, little jungle training, poor intelligence, low morale, confused command structure and lack of air cover all contributed to defeat in Malaya. The Japanese were thoroughly prepared determined and used the jungle effectively.'
<http://www.national-army-museum.ac.u.../far-east.html>
Failure of intel? I dont think so... Failure to appreciate the situation. Probably.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Bedfordshire
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SPAM Acronym
Whilst there is, indeed, a somewhat tasteless and reasonably vitriolic 'solution' to the acronym 'SPAM', another was suggested to me, by an American, in Jordan a few years ago: Self Propelled Automatic Mouth. Even he thought it was amusing and a decidedly accurate description of many of his fellow countrymen.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: northside
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It would be difficult to compare the likes of the Prince of Wales and Repulse to todays modern Navies (be them Armed or Merchant).
The difference is the NBCD training. For instance. Ships Companies of WW2 generally (not all) had little or no training in Damage control and consequently those ships were lost easily. Compare that to 1982 when although the Sheffield was lost as a fighting unit, it actually took days to sink it. The fire raged on board for about 3 days before the ship actually sunk. A beter example would be HMS Nottingham which was saved from certain death by the training (and bravery) of the ship's company.
Whilst we are on the subject of attacking ships, did anyone spot the news last week reference the Somali pirates
Apparently the crew used an LRAD to defend ths ship.
The difference is the NBCD training. For instance. Ships Companies of WW2 generally (not all) had little or no training in Damage control and consequently those ships were lost easily. Compare that to 1982 when although the Sheffield was lost as a fighting unit, it actually took days to sink it. The fire raged on board for about 3 days before the ship actually sunk. A beter example would be HMS Nottingham which was saved from certain death by the training (and bravery) of the ship's company.
Whilst we are on the subject of attacking ships, did anyone spot the news last week reference the Somali pirates
Apparently the crew used an LRAD to defend ths ship.
I'matightbastard
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's a picture of an LRAD. Good job this bloke's not the type to annoy his colleagues, or that they are the type to play merry pranks on each other
...I feel a caption competition coming on
...I feel a caption competition coming on
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 1,256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crude oil from a tanker has to be set alight with the equivalent of long exposure to a blowtorch. The only danger on board is fuel vapour. That doesn't occur of course when it spreads over seawater.
Napalm, bombs etc are completely useless.
Napalm, bombs etc are completely useless.
Cool stuff. I could post my wife on a ship then. God knows she can screan pretty loud.
Got to think a 50 cal would have been nice in persuading the bad guys.
Got to think a 50 cal would have been nice in persuading the bad guys.