Sea Jet
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
WEBF, weren't the Japs on the deck because they were on turn-round? Had they had asv then they might have found their target earlier. As they were out of fuel would AEW have helped them?
Only way round would had been different tactics always retaining fleet AD assets?
Only way round would had been different tactics always retaining fleet AD assets?
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Stoke
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by WE Branch Fanatic
Caught on the deck? It happened to the Japs at Midway, but with AEW/ASaCs......shouldn't happen now.
' In October 2000, the smart-looking aircraft carrier USS Kitty Hawk was “mugged” by Russian SU-24 and Su-27 aircraft, which were not detected until they were virtually on top of the carrier. The Russian aircraft buzzed the carrier’s flight deck and caught the ship completely unprepared. To add insult to injury, the Russians took very detailed photos of the Kitty Hawk’s flight deck, and very courteously, provided the pictures to the American skipper via e-mail. In a story in the December 7, 2000 edition of WorldNetDaily, one US sailor exclaimed, “The entire crew watched overhead as the Russians made a mockery of our feeble attempt of intercepting them.” Russia’s air force is now only a faint shadow of what it once was, but even now, they can demonstrate that they can, if necessary, do significant damage to the US Navy. It is little wonder then that a Russian newspaper gloated that “If these had been planes on a war mission, the aircraft carrier would definitely have been sunk.” '
from http://www.g2mil.com/thompson.htm
I found the above page massively amusing to read whilst fully understanding that it may nit necessarily be so . . .
Is the US Navy Overrated? I hope not, or we will all be in big trouble.
Meanwhile, Navy News has a story about the last few weeks of HMS Grafton. Here.
We’ve had a lot of visitors commenting that they’d seen Shipmates and wanted to talk to sailors to find out what the Royal Navy is like."
Down by the bow and sinking fast?
Meanwhile, Navy News has a story about the last few weeks of HMS Grafton. Here.
We’ve had a lot of visitors commenting that they’d seen Shipmates and wanted to talk to sailors to find out what the Royal Navy is like."
Down by the bow and sinking fast?
Suspicion breeds confidence
Yes indeed. Its scandalous that we are selling an 8 year old front line warship for a fraction of the price she cost to build - its YOUR money the govt are flushing down the toilet boys and girls. At least Chile is a good ally and will take good care of them.
Since the First Sea Lord has said that the Navy does not have enough ships for the tasks demanded of it by the Government, coping with a crisis would be much harder. Without the organic air defence capability provided by the Sea Harrier, high value ships such as amphibious ships (including the new Bay class RFAs) will rely even more on there escorts, which are becoming increasingly scare.
In fact, the frigates/destroyers are becoming high value assets themselves, we cannot afford the loss of a single one. Same goes for MCMVs.
On Google, I found this: In Peril on the Sea
On the "tanker war" of the late 80s:
An important but little known aspect of the Iran-Iraq conflict was the long-running "tanker war," during which Iraqi and Iranian aircraft and naval vessels attacked some 600 oil tankers and cargo ships. Lloyds of London has classified 286 separate anti-ship missile attacks against 260 ships as they passed through the Straits of Hormuz and along the Arabian Gulf. Iraqi Super Etendard, Mirage F1s (there are reports that Iraq also bought several Falcon 50 business jets equipped with F1 radars and ECM systems and used these aircraft in anti-ship strikes because of their greater range and capability to carry two Exocets), and Super Frelon helicopters made the bulk of these attacks. Exocets were also used with some success against oil facilities at Kharg Island. Iranian jets employed bombs and rockets, while ships employed Italian- supplied Sea Killer missiles for attacks on tankers supporting Iraq and the nations buying its oil. During eight years of attacks, more than 150 ships suffered serious damage from missiles, and about 70 were put out of service...
So its not as if the threat is unproven.
In fact, the frigates/destroyers are becoming high value assets themselves, we cannot afford the loss of a single one. Same goes for MCMVs.
On Google, I found this: In Peril on the Sea
On the "tanker war" of the late 80s:
An important but little known aspect of the Iran-Iraq conflict was the long-running "tanker war," during which Iraqi and Iranian aircraft and naval vessels attacked some 600 oil tankers and cargo ships. Lloyds of London has classified 286 separate anti-ship missile attacks against 260 ships as they passed through the Straits of Hormuz and along the Arabian Gulf. Iraqi Super Etendard, Mirage F1s (there are reports that Iraq also bought several Falcon 50 business jets equipped with F1 radars and ECM systems and used these aircraft in anti-ship strikes because of their greater range and capability to carry two Exocets), and Super Frelon helicopters made the bulk of these attacks. Exocets were also used with some success against oil facilities at Kharg Island. Iranian jets employed bombs and rockets, while ships employed Italian- supplied Sea Killer missiles for attacks on tankers supporting Iraq and the nations buying its oil. During eight years of attacks, more than 150 ships suffered serious damage from missiles, and about 70 were put out of service...
So its not as if the threat is unproven.
Have a look at this: Iran sabre rattling
"The exercise was meant to show the West that Iran could stop all oil shipments in the Gulf and destroy numerous oil facilities in Gulf Arab countries," a diplomatic source said.
The exercise included a range of fighter-jets and helicopters from the Iranian Air Force. The navy contributed surface vessels and submarines.
Worrying considering the current crisis over Iran's nuclear programme, talk of sanctions and the possibility of the whole region going pear shaped.
"The exercise was meant to show the West that Iran could stop all oil shipments in the Gulf and destroy numerous oil facilities in Gulf Arab countries," a diplomatic source said.
The exercise included a range of fighter-jets and helicopters from the Iranian Air Force. The navy contributed surface vessels and submarines.
Worrying considering the current crisis over Iran's nuclear programme, talk of sanctions and the possibility of the whole region going pear shaped.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: uk
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Enough Now WEBF..... enough now
Please let the old girl go to rest with some dignity, about time you shut up and stopped posting half informed endless posts about what a bad move scrapping the Sea Harrier is. We all or a good deal of those on this forum realise this, but you ranting endlessy about it is getting boring..........
BHR/Junglie
You don't have to read it!
Today the first of the Type 45 Destroyers, HMS Daring was launched. BBC Scotland have a story: Launch for cutting edge warship.
In 2002, Ministers stated that from 2007, the T45 would help make up the shortfall in defence caused by the loss of the Sea Harrier and organic air defence. However (going back to the BBC)....
The Type 45 will come into service in 2009.....
Still, makes a change to have some good news.
Janes mention it too: RN launches first Type 45 destroyer
When the eight planned destroyers begin to enter service in 2009, they will provide the RN with an advanced AAW capability, particularly pertinent as the service is phasing out its FA.2 Sea Harriers this year.
Doh!!
You don't have to read it!
Today the first of the Type 45 Destroyers, HMS Daring was launched. BBC Scotland have a story: Launch for cutting edge warship.
In 2002, Ministers stated that from 2007, the T45 would help make up the shortfall in defence caused by the loss of the Sea Harrier and organic air defence. However (going back to the BBC)....
The Type 45 will come into service in 2009.....
Still, makes a change to have some good news.
Janes mention it too: RN launches first Type 45 destroyer
When the eight planned destroyers begin to enter service in 2009, they will provide the RN with an advanced AAW capability, particularly pertinent as the service is phasing out its FA.2 Sea Harriers this year.
Doh!!
Last edited by WE Branch Fanatic; 1st Feb 2006 at 23:42.
psst!
Harriers offered to India
More on the site....
Harriers offered to India
Britain today said it had offered eight Sea Harrier jump jets to enable Indian Navy to maintain its naval fighter strength and said New Delhi would receive the first batch of Hawk advanced jet trainers early next year to fill a void in training of fighter pilots.
Gentleman Aviator
RN bloke on the Beeb yesterday ...
...blimey, those Aussie quick bowlers are getting better all the time.....
The Type 45 will produce a "firing solution" on a cricket ball travelling at Mach 2!
Last edited by teeteringhead; 2nd Feb 2006 at 07:27.
The point is why would you be facing an incoming missile at Mach 3? Why not engage the launch platform first? If these nasties were air launched, then the Sea Harrier etc etc etc.
I'matightbastard
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
(there are reports that Iraq also bought several Falcon 50 business jets equipped with F1 radars and ECM systems and used these aircraft in anti-ship strikes because of their greater range and capability to carry two Exocets)
ok, I'll come clean, I've never actually looked at a Falcon 50, but the question still stands.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: northside
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by WE Branch Fanatic
The point is why would you be facing an incoming missile at Mach 3? Why not engage the launch platform first? If these nasties were air launched, then the Sea Harrier etc etc etc.
Or, you could launch a Merlin towards the Cricket Balls and the Merlins could give them a damn good looking at and frighten them away.