This Day in History

Daily Cartoon provided by Bravenet

  #21  
Old 07-19-2006
RustyBayonet's Avatar
RustyBayonet RustyBayonet is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: England
Posts: 81
Default If the Iraniragheads are getting involved...

Surely we can then claim that Iran is attempting to indirectly attack the West by launching assaults on a Western ally?. We should send the Royal Navy and the United States Navy over there, to protect merchant vessels of course! ,

Just out of interest what does Israel define as a Corvette, some countries use that class name to define anything from a Frigate to a Cruiser.
__________________
"You are infantry, you are cannon fodder, get over it!" - Sgt. Maj. W. Wilkinson.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 07-19-2006
UZI4U's Avatar
UZI4U UZI4U is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: San Antonio, Texas.
Posts: 890
Default

http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapo...ar5/Saar5.html

The Sa'ar 5 is almost in the same class as the United States Navy's new Littoral Combat Ship concept... In fact the LCS concept came from the Sa'ar 5. The Israelis are actually helping with the LCS's design a fair bit and intend on buying a few slightly customized ones.

In Royal Navy terms, the Sa'ar 5 is the next size down from the Sheffield class. But the Sa'ar 5 is considerably more advanced.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 07-19-2006
CeeTee's Avatar
CeeTee CeeTee is offline
Super Senior member - Has no life and spends a lot of time here
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: now: Torgau - Germany
Posts: 271
Exclamation when they get the same weapons...

Quote:
Originally Posted by UZI4U
Actually it didn't have too much to do with luck, it had more to do with good weapons and good tactics, something we didn't expect to see from Hezbollah.


The ship was not attacked with a UAV as early reports said. The ship, INS Hanit, a Sa'ar 5 class corvett, was fired on by two Iranian made C-802 anti-ship missiles. The missiles were being operated by well trained members of the Iranian revolutionary guard, two things the IDF didn't expect.


The two missiles were given different attack profiles, one missile attacked in a pop-up attack similar to the profile used by Hellfires and Javalins, gaining a high altitude and then attempting to attack the ship from above. The second missile was given the more typical sea-skimming attack profile, in which it approached the ship at an altitude of about 5 feet above the waterline at mach 0.9.

The onboard Phalanx CIWS on the Hanit engaged and destroyed the top-attack profile C-802, but in the time it took the Phalanx to do this, the second missile maneuvered behind the Hanit, outside of the line of fire of the Phalanx [which is located on the foredeck of the Hanit]. The missile impacted high destroying the helipad and causing a fire. However the fire was quickly controlled. At no point was the Hanit at risk of sinking, the missile hit too high for that.


Good tactics on the part of the Iranians, and a bad choice of target priority by the CIWS. However it is a one time thing, the Israelis have already adapted their tactics and weaponry to the threat.



No one was expecting the Iranian Guards or C-802s to be involved in this.




The Iranians did have success nearly sinking an Egyptian freighter with the same weapon, however.

it means that if they get weapons at the same israeli's level, then it's shit.
Big details about the attack. But if we can have so detailed information, why not predict what happened?
Israel was always one step ahead terrorists. What went wrong?
And don't tell me you're surprised about Iran being involved.

../ct
__________________
.--. . .
.. -.
- .... .
... .. -. -.-
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 07-20-2006
UZI4U's Avatar
UZI4U UZI4U is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: San Antonio, Texas.
Posts: 890
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CeeTee
it means that if they get weapons at the same israeli's level, then it's shit.
Big details about the attack. But if we can have so detailed information, why not predict what happened?
Israel was always one step ahead terrorists. What went wrong?
And don't tell me you're surprised about Iran being involved.

../ct

Suprised at them being involved? Nooooooo.

Suprised at them providing their best anti-ship missiles to Hezbollah? Yes.



Back when the Soviet Union was supporting North Vietnam, they never sold their best gear to Hanoi, much less give it away, and the Soviet Union had a lot more extra stuff to throw around.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 07-20-2006
RustyBayonet's Avatar
RustyBayonet RustyBayonet is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: England
Posts: 81
Default Anti-missile gun placement

Quote:
Originally Posted by UZI4U
http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapo...ar5/Saar5.html

The Sa'ar 5 is almost in the same class as the United States Navy's new Littoral Combat Ship concept... In fact the LCS concept came from the Sa'ar 5. The Israelis are actually helping with the LCS's design a fair bit and intend on buying a few slightly customized ones.

In Royal Navy terms, the Sa'ar 5 is the next size down from the Sheffield class. But the Sa'ar 5 is considerably more advanced.

I often fail to understand why so many lighter warhships put their anti-missile cannon on the bow resulting it having a seriously limited arc of fire, what are you meant to do if you have a missile approaching the stern?
__________________
"You are infantry, you are cannon fodder, get over it!" - Sgt. Maj. W. Wilkinson.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 07-20-2006
UZI4U's Avatar
UZI4U UZI4U is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: San Antonio, Texas.
Posts: 890
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RustyBayonet
I often fail to understand why so many lighter warhships put their anti-missile cannon on the bow resulting it having a seriously limited arc of fire, what are you meant to do if you have a missile approaching the stern?

I think, due to it being an Israeli warship and not a French one, the general idea is that it would be heading towards the threat.



In reality the Sa'ar class is a modular weapon ship. That point where you see the Phalanx is a bit like a lego-set, the Phalanx can be removed and replaced with a 3" gun, or some other weapon systems.

Some comprimise was made on the Sa'ar 5 to give it a helipad in place of a second turret. If it had a second turret at that location [as the Israeli version of the LCS will], it could have 360 degree Phalanx coverage.


Placing the Phalanx higher on the ship, where it can get a better line of sight sounds like a good idea. But the higher the Phalanx is off the waterline, the harder it will be for it to kill enemy sea-skimming missiles.

The Sa'ar 5, and later the USN/Israeli LCS, are about as far as one can take a traditional combat vessle. The next generation of ships after these will be radically different, and won't have these problems. But those ships aren't here yet.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 07-20-2006
JCoyote JCoyote is offline
Super Senior member - Has no life and spends a lot of time here
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Choctaw, OK
Posts: 615
Send a message via AIM to JCoyote
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by UZI4U
Placing the Phalanx higher on the ship, where it can get a better line of sight sounds like a good idea. But the higher the Phalanx is off the waterline, the harder it will be for it to kill enemy sea-skimming missiles.

To be honest, I think placing it high on a ship could give an advantage for engaging incoming sea skimming missiles. It would allow a firing angle clear of surface chop and other interference. While it couldn't fire head-on to a missile's course, that's hardly necessary with rotary cannon and fairly rare regardless of cannon placement.

I think ideal would be a mounting on the highest point on the ship (which in modern low profile ships really shouldn't be all that high) of a 40mm rotary cannon. It could arc on any approach to the ship, and would have flak shells of multiple fusings. Some proximity, some radar, some IR... at 4000+ RPM there could be a real advantage just firing a different fuse type out of each barrel. And of course, the oft forgotten... there needs to be a manual firing override. Simply pointing this beast at any boat that gets too close can tell you who is a terrorist... if they don't piss their pants and run they obviously are have suicidally ill intentions.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 07-20-2006
RustyBayonet's Avatar
RustyBayonet RustyBayonet is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: England
Posts: 81
Default Modern anti-missile systems

Do modern anti-missile systems still suffer from target designation problems when they have multiple targets in very close proximity of each other - causing the targeting computer to be unable to prioritise a target and reset itsellf - I always thought that was a tad silly, and that in that situation the computer would just randomly choose one of the targets - being hit by one missile is still better then being hit by two.
__________________
"You are infantry, you are cannon fodder, get over it!" - Sgt. Maj. W. Wilkinson.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 07-20-2006
PT-The Italian Commie's Avatar
PT-The Italian Commie PT-The Italian Commie is offline
Super Senior member - Has no life and spends a lot of time here
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sardinia, Italy
Posts: 2,611
Default Ships have always had their troubles with missiles.

You, Mr. Rusty, as well as the Frenchmen around, should know that during the Falkland war the Argentinean Air Force inflicted lots of severe naval losses to the British Task Force by using French-made Aerospatiale MM-38/MM-40 "Exocet" air-to-sea missiles that fly on the waterline (too high for the detection systems of the submarines, too low for the detection systems of ships and aircrafts). My opinion (not wanting to enter into the political matter of this war, this means, not wanting to express my opinion whether I am FOR or AGAINST this war) is that, if the Hezbollah is equipped with latest-technology Iranian hardware and has the direct technical and military assistance of Iranian "Pasdaran" troops, well, the Israeli shall better prepare to cry A LOT of blood, and even then, they'd better start thinking of what to do shall they NOT win the war (not impossible, if what I said is real).
__________________
"It is criminal to teach a man not to defend himself, when he is the constant victim of brutal attacks. It is legal and lawful to own a shotgun or a rifle. We believe in obeying the law." -- Malcolm X

"We (atheists) act in good conscience because we believe in moral principles, not because we expect a reward in Heaven." -- Margherita Hack


Last edited by PT-The Italian Commie : 07-20-2006 at 03:57 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 07-20-2006
Mk23 Mk23 is offline
Super Senior member - Has no life and spends a lot of time here
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 320
Default Oh please...

PT, despite everything you're saying about the Exocet being technically accurate.




I REALLY, /REALLY/ doubt that this conflict will be decided in a naval engagement.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:29 PM.


Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright SecurityArms.com 1995 - 2009