Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Posted: 4/2/2006 12:01:40 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/2/2006 12:04:37 PM EDT by Strats]
Now on FOX News.

Looking for link.

Link here

Iran Calls Second Missile Test a Success

By ALI AKBAR DAREINI Associated Press Writer
© 2006 The Associated Press

TEHRAN, Iran — Iran announced its second major new missile test within days, saying Sunday it has successfully fired a high-speed torpedo capable of destroying huge warships and submarines.

The tests came during war games that Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards have been holding in the Gulf and the Arabian Sea since Friday at a time of increased tensions with the United States over Tehran's nuclear program.

The Iranian-made torpedo _ called the "Hoot," or "whale" _ has a speed of 223 miles per hour, said Gen. Ali Fadavi, deputy head of the Revolutionary Guards' Navy.

That would make it about three or four times faster than a normal torpedo and as fast as the world's known fastest, the Russian-made VA-111 Shkval, developed in 1995. It was not immediately known if the Hoot was based on the Shkval.

"It has a very powerful warhead designed to hit big submarines. Even if enemy warship sensors identify the missile, no warship can escape from this missile because of its high speed," Fadavi told state-run television.

It was not immediately clear whether the torpedo can carry a nuclear warhead.

State-run television, which stopped its normal programs to break news of the test, showed a brief clip of the launch from a ship into the waters of the Gulf. Television pictures also showed the torpedo hitting the target, a ship on the surface of the water.

The new weapon could raise concerns over Iran's naval power in the Gulf, where during the war with Iraq in the 1980s Iranian forces attacked oil tankers from Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, prompting a massive U.S. naval operation to protect them. The U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet is based on the tiny Arab island nation of Bahrain in the Gulf.

Cmdr. Jeff Breslau of the 5th Fleet said no special measures were taken by U.S. forces based on Bahrain in reaction to the Iranian war games, even after the latest missile test.

"They can conduct exercises whenever they want and they frequently do, just as we do. We conduct exercises throughout this region," he told The Associated Press by telephone.

He would not comment on whether the new torpedo represents a threat to American forces in the region.

"In general terms, no matter where we operate in the world, we're aware of other capabilities that exist and of other countries that aren't as friendly to the U.S., and we pay attention to those capabilities," he said.

On Friday, the first day of the war games, Iran test-fired the Fajr-3 missile, which can avoid radar and hit several targets simultaneously using multiple warheads. The Guards said the test was successful.

More than 17,000 Revolutionary Guards forces are taking part in the weeklong maneuvers. On Sunday, paratroops practiced a drop in an attack on a mock enemy position, and warships, jet fighters, helicopters and sophisticated electronic equipment were used in other exercises.

Iran, which views the United States as an arch foe and is concerned about the U.S. military presence in neighboring Iraq and Afghanistan, says the maneuvers aim to develop the Guards' defensive capabilities.

Iran has routinely held war games over the past two decades to improve its combat readiness and test locally made equipment such as missiles, tanks and armored personnel carriers.

The missile tests and war games this time around coincide with increasing tension between Iran and the West over Tehran's controversial nuclear program.

The United States and its allies believe Iran is seeking to develop nuclear weapons, but Tehran denies that, saying its program is for generating electricity.

The U.N. Security Council is demanding that Iran halt its uranium enrichment activities. But an Iranian envoy said its activities are "not reversible."

Iran launched an arms development program during its 1980-88 war with Iraq to compensate for a U.S. weapons embargo. Since 1992, Iran has produced its own tanks, armored personnel carriers, missiles and a fighter plane.
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 12:05:34 PM EDT
Tag.

Things are heatin up.
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 12:06:54 PM EDT

The United States and its allies believe Iran is seeking to develop nuclear weapons, but Tehran denies that, saying its program is for generating electricity.


There's only one way to be sure.
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 12:07:07 PM EDT
ehhhh
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 12:10:24 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/2/2006 12:11:08 PM EDT by Billybob2002]
www.iribnews.ir/PhotoGallery/Photo/_e083926f-af30-4776-b72a-a88404f5c8bb.wmv

Vid...

Left cold...
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 12:12:02 PM EDT
Would that qualify as a weapon of mass destruction?

Link Posted: 4/2/2006 12:16:37 PM EDT
Anyone care to tell me how a Third World country like Iran out-does the rest of the world in any area of technology? No matter. Our ICBM trumps their little torpedo.
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 12:18:40 PM EDT
Here is what I'm reading.

Iran: Please bitch slap me.

US: OK
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 12:20:20 PM EDT
Yep, this is going to be really effective against an armor battalion.
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 12:23:41 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Old_Painless:

The United States and its allies believe Iran is seeking to develop nuclear weapons, but Tehran denies that, saying its program is for generating electricity.


There's only one way to be sure.



nuke em from orbit?
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 12:29:00 PM EDT

Originally Posted By tc556guy:
Anyone care to tell me how a Third World country like Iran out-does the rest of the world in any area of technology? No matter. Our ICBM trumps their little torpedo.





Yeah, i'll tell you how. look a little to the north.
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 12:33:22 PM EDT

Originally Posted By tc556guy:
Anyone care to tell me how a Third World country like Iran out-does the rest of the world in any area of technology? No matter. Our ICBM trumps their little torpedo.


They have the very latest military hardware from China and Russia. Look up the Yakhont and Sunburn anti-ship missile. They have them and they have been designed to defeat all modern US Navy counter measures. They also have the very latest anti-air and anti-armor technology. They also have very good balistic missiles and plenty of them.
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 12:33:32 PM EDT
I was just reading about supercavitating torpedos the other day. Seems there is one minor drawback, THEY AREN'T GUIDED. The bubble of air around them prevents contact with the water, so acoustic sensors don't work. All you have to do if one is fired at you is stop, or turn. That should be tough.
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 12:35:20 PM EDT

Originally Posted By soccermike7:

Originally Posted By tc556guy:
Anyone care to tell me how a Third World country like Iran out-does the rest of the world in any area of technology? No matter. Our ICBM trumps their little torpedo.





Yeah, i'll tell you how. look a little to the north.



+1



to



=

Link Posted: 4/2/2006 12:37:14 PM EDT

Originally Posted By krpind:
Here is what I'm reading.

Iran: Please bitch slap me.

US: OK



It's almost like a taunting so that the muslim world war will start. What are they thinking?
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 12:39:38 PM EDT
Tag.


-K
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 12:43:40 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Belloc:

Originally Posted By tc556guy:
Anyone care to tell me how a Third World country like Iran out-does the rest of the world in any area of technology? No matter. Our ICBM trumps their little torpedo.


They have the very latest military hardware from China and Russia. Look up the Yakhont and Sunburn anti-ship missile. They have them and they have been designed to defeat all modern US Navy counter measures. They also have the very latest anti-air and anti-armor technology. They also have very good balistic missiles and plenty of them.


OK, so their technology is parasitic, not in-house. Gotcha.
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 12:46:41 PM EDT

Originally Posted By tc556guy:

Originally Posted By Belloc:

Originally Posted By tc556guy:
Anyone care to tell me how a Third World country like Iran out-does the rest of the world in any area of technology? No matter. Our ICBM trumps their little torpedo.


They have the very latest military hardware from China and Russia. Look up the Yakhont and Sunburn anti-ship missile. They have them and they have been designed to defeat all modern US Navy counter measures. They also have the very latest anti-air and anti-armor technology. They also have very good balistic missiles and plenty of them.


OK, so their technology is parasitic, not in-house. Gotcha.



Not quite. They have a good in house program as well. They have not just purchaed goods, but know-how.
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 12:54:03 PM EDT
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 12:56:11 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Chairborne:
I was just reading about supercavitating torpedos the other day. Seems there is one minor drawback, THEY AREN'T GUIDED. The bubble of air around them prevents contact with the water, so acoustic sensors don't work. All you have to do if one is fired at you is stop, or turn. That should be tough.



The Original Shkval (circa the late '70s) was unguided. The first guided model was deployed in the the late '90s...


www.periscope.ucg.com/mdb-smpl/weapons/minetorp/torpedo/w0004768.shtml

DESCRIPTION
The Shkval("squall") is a high-speed supercavitating rocket-propelled torpedo designed to be a rapid-reaction defense against U.S. submarines undetected by sonar. It can also be used as a countermeasure to an incoming torpedo, forcing the hostile projectile to abruptly change course and possibly break its guidance wires.

The solid-rocket propelled torpedo achieves a high velocity of 230 mph (386 kmh) by producing an envelope of supercavitating bubbles from its nose and skin, which coat the entire weapon surface in a thin layer of gas. This causes the metal skin of the weapon to avoid contact with the water, significantly reducing drag and friction.

The Shkval is fired from the standard 533-mm torpedo tube at a depth of up to 328 ft (100 m). The rocket-powered torpedo exits the tube at 50 knots (93 kmh) and then ignites the rocket motor, propelling the weapon to speeds four to five times faster than other conventional torpedoes. The weapon reportedly has an 80 percent kill probability at a range of 7,655 yd (7,000 m).

The torpedo is guided by an autopilot rather than by a homing head as on most torpedoes. The initial version was unguided. However, the Russians have indicated there is a homing version that starts at the higher speed but slows and enters a search mode.

PICTURES



STATUS
The weapon was deployed in the early 1990s, and had been in service for years when its existence was publicly disclosed. In 1995, it was revealed that development had begun in the 1960s, when the Research Institute NII-24, previously involved in artillery ammunition research, was ordered to help develop an underwater high-speed missile to combat nuclear-powered submarines. On May 14, 1969, a government mandate created the Research Institute of Applied Hydromechanics (NII PGM), which was the predecessor of today's Region Scientific Production Association.

A modernized "Shkval" was placed on display at the 1995 international armaments show in Abu Dhabi, but it was discarded. Later, an improved model was designed with a conventional warhead and a guided targeting system. The first tests of this "smart" Shkval torpedo were conducted by the Russian Pacific Fleet in early 1998.

The Region Scientific Production Association has developed an export modification of the missile, the Shkval-E. Russia first marketed this conventionally armed version at the IDEX 99 exhibition in Abu Dhabi in early 1999.

Russia reportedly sold China 40 conventionally armed Shkval-Es in the mid-1990s.

BUILDER(S)
Region State Research and Production Enterprise, Moscow

USERS/PLATFORMS

Russia

CHARACTERISTICS

DIMENSIONS:
Length 26 ft 11 in (8,200 mm)
Diameter 1 ft 9 in ( 533 mm)
Weight 5,953 lb (2,700 kg)
PERFORMANCE:
Speed
Maximum 230 mph (360 kmh; 100 m/sec; 200 kts)
Some reports say in excess of 300 mph (483 kmh)
Exit from tube 50 kts (93 kmh)
Range
80 percent Pkill 7,655 yd (7,000 m)
WARHEAD:
Explosive
Weight 463 lb (210 kg)
Type TNT
Fuze contact/proximity

VARIANTS
Shkval High-Speed Underwater Rocket

Original unguided production model. Uses a tactical nuclear warhead on a timer to destroy incoming torpedoes and/or the submarine that launched them. This model was deployed in 1977; it could only be fired in a straight line and had a range of about 10 miles (16.2 km).

Improved Shkval

Original model with guided targeting system and a conventional warhead.

Shkval-E

Export variant. This model requires the crew of a submarine or ship to define the target's parameters -- speed, distance and vector. The torpedo must also be fed data for the automatic pilot. This variant does not have a homing warhead and must follow a computer-generated program.

ISSUES AND NOTES
U.S. intelligence experts call the nuclear-equipped Shkval a "revenge weapon," as it would destroy its target and the submarine that launched it. Russian sources have disagreed with this assessment, saying that the double-hull construction of Soviet-built submarines could withstand the resultant nuclear shockwave.

On April 5, 2000, an American businessman, Edmond Pope, and a Russian colleague were arrested by the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) in Moscow. The men were charged with stealing scientific secrets -- specifically information on the Shkval torpedo. Pope, a retired U.S. Navy captain who spent the majority of his career working in naval intelligence, was then the head of a private security firm. Two weeks after the arrest, the FSB claimed that Pope was seeking plans for the high-speed underwater missile. The retired navy officer was detained during informal contact with one of the Russian scientists who helped to create the torpedo.

Pope spent eight months in the Russian Lefortovo prison awaiting trial. He was convicted of espionage and sentenced to 20 years. On Dec. 14, 2000, Russian President Vladimir Putin pardoned Pope on humanitarian grounds; the American has been suffering from bone cancer.

Pope was in Russia as a businessman to purchase Russian technology when he apparently fell prey to a Canadian intelligence operation intent on purchasing the Shkval torpedoes, according to U.S. intelligence sources.

OPERATIONAL NOTES
None.
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 12:56:19 PM EDT

Originally Posted By tc556guy:
Anyone care to tell me how a Third World country like Iran out-does the rest of the world in any area of technology? No matter. Our ICBM trumps their little torpedo.


They don't. The Russians have developed this torpedo many, many years ago. It's not that big of a deal. It has serious limitations to it.
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 12:56:54 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Belloc:

Originally Posted By tc556guy:
Anyone care to tell me how a Third World country like Iran out-does the rest of the world in any area of technology? No matter. Our ICBM trumps their little torpedo.


They have the very latest military hardware from China and Russia. Look up the Yakhont and Sunburn anti-ship missile. They have them and they have been designed to defeat all modern US Navy counter measures. They also have the very latest anti-air and anti-armor technology. They also have very good balistic missiles and plenty of them.


That's .
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 1:03:22 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mcantu:


The Original Shkval (circa the late '70s) was unguided. The first guided model was deployed in the the late '90s...


www.periscope.ucg.com/mdb-smpl/weapons/minetorp/torpedo/w0004768.shtml

DESCRIPTION
The Shkval("squall") is a high-speed supercavitating rocket-propelled torpedo designed to be a rapid-reaction defense against U.S. submarines undetected by sonar. It can also be used as a countermeasure to an incoming torpedo, forcing the hostile projectile to abruptly change course and possibly break its guidance wires.

The solid-rocket propelled torpedo achieves a high velocity of 230 mph (386 kmh) by producing an envelope of supercavitating bubbles from its nose and skin, which coat the entire weapon surface in a thin layer of gas. This causes the metal skin of the weapon to avoid contact with the water, significantly reducing drag and friction.

The Shkval is fired from the standard 533-mm torpedo tube at a depth of up to 328 ft (100 m). The rocket-powered torpedo exits the tube at 50 knots (93 kmh) and then ignites the rocket motor, propelling the weapon to speeds four to five times faster than other conventional torpedoes. The weapon reportedly has an 80 percent kill probability at a range of 7,655 yd (7,000 m).

The torpedo is guided by an autopilot rather than by a homing head as on most torpedoes. The initial version was unguided. However, the Russians have indicated there is a homing version that starts at the higher speed but slows and enters a search mode.

PICTURES

www.periscope.ucg.com/mdb-smpl/images/w0004768.jpg

STATUS
The weapon was deployed in the early 1990s, and had been in service for years when its existence was publicly disclosed. In 1995, it was revealed that development had begun in the 1960s, when the Research Institute NII-24, previously involved in artillery ammunition research, was ordered to help develop an underwater high-speed missile to combat nuclear-powered submarines. On May 14, 1969, a government mandate created the Research Institute of Applied Hydromechanics (NII PGM), which was the predecessor of today's Region Scientific Production Association.

A modernized "Shkval" was placed on display at the 1995 international armaments show in Abu Dhabi, but it was discarded. Later, an improved model was designed with a conventional warhead and a guided targeting system. The first tests of this "smart" Shkval torpedo were conducted by the Russian Pacific Fleet in early 1998.

The Region Scientific Production Association has developed an export modification of the missile, the Shkval-E. Russia first marketed this conventionally armed version at the IDEX 99 exhibition in Abu Dhabi in early 1999.

Russia reportedly sold China 40 conventionally armed Shkval-Es in the mid-1990s.

BUILDER(S)
Region State Research and Production Enterprise, Moscow

USERS/PLATFORMS

Russia

CHARACTERISTICS

DIMENSIONS:
Length 26 ft 11 in (8,200 mm)
Diameter 1 ft 9 in ( 533 mm)
Weight 5,953 lb (2,700 kg)
PERFORMANCE:
Speed
Maximum 230 mph (360 kmh; 100 m/sec; 200 kts)
Some reports say in excess of 300 mph (483 kmh)
Exit from tube 50 kts (93 kmh)
Range
80 percent Pkill 7,655 yd (7,000 m)
WARHEAD:
Explosive
Weight 463 lb (210 kg)
Type TNT
Fuze contact/proximity

VARIANTS
Shkval High-Speed Underwater Rocket

Original unguided production model. Uses a tactical nuclear warhead on a timer to destroy incoming torpedoes and/or the submarine that launched them. This model was deployed in 1977; it could only be fired in a straight line and had a range of about 10 miles (16.2 km).

Improved Shkval

Original model with guided targeting system and a conventional warhead.

Shkval-E

Export variant. This model requires the crew of a submarine or ship to define the target's parameters -- speed, distance and vector. The torpedo must also be fed data for the automatic pilot. This variant does not have a homing warhead and must follow a computer-generated program.

ISSUES AND NOTES
U.S. intelligence experts call the nuclear-equipped Shkval a "revenge weapon," as it would destroy its target and the submarine that launched it. Russian sources have disagreed with this assessment, saying that the double-hull construction of Soviet-built submarines could withstand the resultant nuclear shockwave.

On April 5, 2000, an American businessman, Edmond Pope, and a Russian colleague were arrested by the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) in Moscow. The men were charged with stealing scientific secrets -- specifically information on the Shkval torpedo. Pope, a retired U.S. Navy captain who spent the majority of his career working in naval intelligence, was then the head of a private security firm. Two weeks after the arrest, the FSB claimed that Pope was seeking plans for the high-speed underwater missile. The retired navy officer was detained during informal contact with one of the Russian scientists who helped to create the torpedo.

Pope spent eight months in the Russian Lefortovo prison awaiting trial. He was convicted of espionage and sentenced to 20 years. On Dec. 14, 2000, Russian President Vladimir Putin pardoned Pope on humanitarian grounds; the American has been suffering from bone cancer.

Pope was in Russia as a businessman to purchase Russian technology when he apparently fell prey to a Canadian intelligence operation intent on purchasing the Shkval torpedoes, according to U.S. intelligence sources.

OPERATIONAL NOTES
None.



That's my point. They can't actively track targets at 230 mph. I meant unguided as in not actively guided like normal "homing" torpedoes.
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 1:05:05 PM EDT
Has anyone else read Michael DiMercurio?? He was talking about events like this, and supercavitating torpedos, fifteen years ago. (Wait till you get a load of his virtual sonar suite--)

Check out www.ussdevilfish.com/ for the titles. Start with Voyage of the Devilfish.
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 1:09:30 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/2/2006 1:11:19 PM EDT by tekloid]

Originally Posted By dport:
That's .



And that's hubris.
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 1:11:17 PM EDT

Originally Posted By tekloid:

Originally Posted By dport:
That's .



That's hubris.


That's not knowing the current status on US systems designed to counter those systems.
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 1:12:22 PM EDT

Originally Posted By dport:

Originally Posted By tekloid:

Originally Posted By dport:
That's .



That's hubris.


That's not knowing the current status on US systems designed to counter those systems.



link? info?
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 1:17:53 PM EDT

Originally Posted By tekloid:

Originally Posted By dport:

Originally Posted By tekloid:

Originally Posted By dport:
That's .



That's hubris.


That's not knowing the current status on US systems designed to counter those systems.



link? info?



You're obviously not aware of what Dport does for a living, are you?
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 1:20:20 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Chairborne:

Originally Posted By tekloid:

Originally Posted By dport:

Originally Posted By tekloid:

Originally Posted By dport:
That's .



That's hubris.


That's not knowing the current status on US systems designed to counter those systems.



link? info?



You're obviously not aware of what Dport does for a living, are you?



With a name like Dport, I'd first guess he's with the INS...(get it? ) but I suspect otherwise.

What does Dport do?
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 1:20:46 PM EDT

Originally Posted By tekloid:

Originally Posted By dport:

Originally Posted By tekloid:

Originally Posted By dport:
That's .



That's hubris.


That's not knowing the current status on US systems designed to counter those systems.



link? info?


No link. No info.

You're just going to have to trust me. The US has been working on those issues for quite some time.

They are good missiles. Quite frankly, they're better than any we field. However, they are not without countermeasure.
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 1:23:44 PM EDT
Range?

Guidance?


Is it just a point and shoot?


Link Posted: 4/2/2006 1:26:40 PM EDT
I say we just pee on them from a jet. That will teach them
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 1:30:53 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Maxwell71:
I say we just pee on them from a jet. That will teach them


three monsters and a double pak of animal stack and i will ruin their day
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 1:34:00 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/2/2006 1:34:32 PM EDT by Chairborne]

Originally Posted By Zippy_The_Wonderdog:

Originally Posted By Chairborne:

Originally Posted By tekloid:

Originally Posted By dport:

Originally Posted By tekloid:

Originally Posted By dport:
That's .



That's hubris.


That's not knowing the current status on US systems designed to counter those systems.



link? info?



You're obviously not aware of what Dport does for a living, are you?



With a name like Dport, I'd first guess he's with the INS...(get it? ) but I suspect otherwise.

What does Dport do?



Suffice it to say his job requires him to have extensive unclassified and classified information on all surface and subsurface Naval Warfare threats. I would never doubt his knowlege of anything in those fields. I would likewise not probe for sources, specifics, etc. unless you want to try to compromise our national security.
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 1:56:24 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Chairborne:
Suffice it to say his job requires him to have extensive unclassified and classified information on all surface and subsurface Naval Warfare threats. I would never doubt his knowlege of anything in those fields. I would likewise not probe for sources, specifics, etc. unless you want to try to compromise our national security.


But, I'm no LWilde.
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 1:59:31 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Chairborne:

Suffice it to say his job requires him to have extensive unclassified and classified information on all surface and subsurface Naval Warfare threats. I would never doubt his knowlege of anything in those fields. I would likewise not probe for sources, specifics, etc. unless you want to try to compromise our national security.



If that were the case I would have to imagine that someone working with classified information posting anything about US Navy ability or counter measures on an public internet gun forum would make his superiors very unhappy.
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 2:03:30 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Belloc:

Originally Posted By Chairborne:

Suffice it to say his job requires him to have extensive unclassified and classified information on all surface and subsurface Naval Warfare threats. I would never doubt his knowlege of anything in those fields. I would likewise not probe for sources, specifics, etc. unless you want to try to compromise our national security.



If that were the case I would have to imagine that someone working with classified information posting anything about US Navy ability or counter measures on an public internet gun forum would make his superiors very unhappy.


How did I reveal anything of consequence? I didn't. All I said was the statement is BS, which it is. There are countermeasures to every known weapon system. Do they all work? We won't know until we face them. Are they technical or procedural in nature? I didn't reveal that.

To think the US Navy has sat around for years while knowing about these systems doing nothing is plain stupid.
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 2:07:57 PM EDT
The F-22 can kick that torpedoes ass.
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 2:08:05 PM EDT
.
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 2:11:25 PM EDT

Originally Posted By dport:

Originally Posted By Belloc:

Originally Posted By Chairborne:

Suffice it to say his job requires him to have extensive unclassified and classified information on all surface and subsurface Naval Warfare threats. I would never doubt his knowlege of anything in those fields. I would likewise not probe for sources, specifics, etc. unless you want to try to compromise our national security.



If that were the case I would have to imagine that someone working with classified information posting anything about US Navy ability or counter measures on an public internet gun forum would make his superiors very unhappy.


How did I reveal anything of consequence? I didn't. All I said was the statement is BS, which it is. There are countermeasures to every known weapon system. Do they all work? We won't know until we face them. Are they technical or procedural in nature? I didn't reveal that.

To think the US Navy has sat around for years while knowing about these systems doing nothing is plain stupid.


I have only known 2 people who have worked with classified information. They both stated that they simply could not say boo about anything even remotely related to what they did , even information known to be in the public domain.
I am not stating that what you are saying is false, or what is being said about you is not true, just that from these 2 gentlemen the rules are rather, rather strict.
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 2:11:49 PM EDT

Originally Posted By dport:


To think the US Navy has sat around for years while knowing about these systems doing nothing is plain stupid.




My friend, the Navy began WWII with a torpedo exploder which had been tested in the ocean (1) one time and failed that test. WWII had been going for months and the Burea of Weapons still refused to belive the POS magnetic exploder would not work despite p[ics of the damn torpedos hitting ships and bouncing off !!

Now I LOVE my Navy (especially the Sub Service) but the Admirals may very well have been sitting around with their collective heads up their collective asses. Couple that Muslim torpedo with the Kilo sub the Russians have been exporting and you could have a nasty little package. Is our shit better ?? Oh hell yes but that does not mean their shit is worthless.

5sub
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 2:32:27 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/2/2006 2:36:06 PM EDT by Tromatic]

Originally Posted By 5subslr5:

Originally Posted By dport:
To think the US Navy has sat around for years while knowing about these systems doing nothing is plain stupid.


My friend, the Navy began WWII with a torpedo exploder which had been tested in the ocean (1) one time and failed that test. WWII had been going for months and the Burea of Weapons still refused to belive the POS magnetic exploder would not work despite p[ics of the damn torpedos hitting ships and bouncing off !!
Now I LOVE my Navy (especially the Sub Service) but the Admirals may very well have been sitting around with their collective heads up their collective asses. Couple that Muslim torpedo with the Kilo sub the Russians have been exporting and you could have a nasty little package. Is our shit better ?? Oh hell yes but that does not mean their shit is worthless.
5sub



But our stuff is better! We are invincible! We are going to get BF'ed one day. If we have to fight a first-world power, we better go hard all they way, and not fuck around like we are doing in Iraq. Seems to me that guerrilla warfare would work just as well with modern weapons such as torpedoes and missiles. What Iranian or Chinese leader gives a shit that 50 aircraft are lost, if one of our ships gets whacked? I can think of one easy way to put a carrier on the bottom over there, and if I can, so can they.

We are at a political disadvantage becuase our shit list changes every four to eight years, and they just continue with their plans. If we get a liberal dick-sucker in 08 who lets them get stronger, we have problems.
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 3:08:47 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Belloc:

Originally Posted By dport:

Originally Posted By Belloc:

Originally Posted By Chairborne:

Suffice it to say his job requires him to have extensive unclassified and classified information on all surface and subsurface Naval Warfare threats. I would never doubt his knowlege of anything in those fields. I would likewise not probe for sources, specifics, etc. unless you want to try to compromise our national security.



If that were the case I would have to imagine that someone working with classified information posting anything about US Navy ability or counter measures on an public internet gun forum would make his superiors very unhappy.


How did I reveal anything of consequence? I didn't. All I said was the statement is BS, which it is. There are countermeasures to every known weapon system. Do they all work? We won't know until we face them. Are they technical or procedural in nature? I didn't reveal that.

To think the US Navy has sat around for years while knowing about these systems doing nothing is plain stupid.


I have only known 2 people who have worked with classified information. They both stated that they simply could not say boo about anything even remotely related to what they did , even information known to be in the public domain.
I am not stating that what you are saying is false, or what is being said about you is not true, just that from these 2 gentlemen the rules are rather, rather strict.


Rules about classified information is strict. However, nothing I have said is classified.
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 3:10:18 PM EDT

Originally Posted By 5subslr5:

Originally Posted By dport:


To think the US Navy has sat around for years while knowing about these systems doing nothing is plain stupid.




My friend, the Navy began WWII with a torpedo exploder which had been tested in the ocean (1) one time and failed that test. WWII had been going for months and the Burea of Weapons still refused to belive the POS magnetic exploder would not work despite p[ics of the damn torpedos hitting ships and bouncing off !!

Now I LOVE my Navy (especially the Sub Service) but the Admirals may very well have been sitting around with their collective heads up their collective asses. Couple that Muslim torpedo with the Kilo sub the Russians have been exporting and you could have a nasty little package. Is our shit better ?? Oh hell yes but that does not mean their shit is worthless.

5sub


OK when did I say their stuff is worthless? I didn't. I even said I think their ASMs are better than ours.
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 3:18:32 PM EDT
ASk the crew of the Kursk how badass those torpedoes are.


Link Posted: 4/2/2006 3:20:36 PM EDT
http://www.softwar.net/3m82.html

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/966345/posts

I don't post things that are not already in the public realm.

And oh by the way, some of the things I post in the public realm aren't necessarily true. Not my job to sort it all out for you.
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 3:21:34 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/2/2006 3:23:00 PM EDT by No-Worries]
Lets see now...How many jets did we sell the Iranians in earlier years and they couldn't keep them in the air????


Flood tubes 3 and 4 and plot a solution...

Link Posted: 4/2/2006 3:32:28 PM EDT

Originally Posted By dport:

And oh by the way, some of the things I post in the public realm aren't necessarily true. Not my job to sort it all out for you.



HA! I knew it. The Superhornet really does suck.



Link Posted: 4/2/2006 3:42:00 PM EDT
I heard this over 1010 WINS and I immediately thought of the supercavitating torpedo. It is an exclusively Russian technology so if the Iranians really have it, we know who gave it to them.
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 3:52:49 PM EDT
One more article on it.
http://www.strategypage.com/dls/articles/200552912425.asp

Personally, I like the last countermeasure. It's always the best countermeasure for any type of warfare.
Link Posted: 4/2/2006 3:59:35 PM EDT

Originally Posted By CitySlicker:
I heard this over 1010 WINS and I immediately thought of the supercavitating torpedo. It is an exclusively Russian technology so if the Iranians really have it, we know who gave it to them.



Well the Russians sold em to the Chinese too...they could have come from there also
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Top Top