Well, we're going to war, so POST AWESOME MILITARY PICS - Page 4

Verto · March 18, 2003, 22:51

Quote:

Originally posted by Plan Austral
I mean, America owes a lot of its international postition to wars.

So do most other countries.

C'mon, more pics!

Dis · March 18, 2003, 23:08

Battleships are obsolete.

We don't currently have any in service for a reason.

Zylka · March 18, 2003, 23:37

I hadn't a clue they were officially out of service. Thought even a few might be put away for shelling use of beach-heads in campaigns with less threatening opposition

Dis · March 18, 2003, 23:42

I think we should keep them in service because they look cool

but they take like 1700 people to operate. Very expensive to operarte. They put some missle tubes on them to make them more effective. Actually that was their primary weapon in the Gulf War.

Zylka · March 18, 2003, 23:48

The fact that pretty much any backyard nation could sink one with a small shore based missle is a serious issue probably.... 1700 people are a lot to risk to one shot, for the minimal advantages gained

Dis · March 18, 2003, 23:50

they don't go down that easy!

Zylka · March 18, 2003, 23:51

mmmk

I just vaguely remember stories of a British cruiser/destroyer being sunk off of Argentina by a single exeter missle

Granted battleships have much heavier hulls... but the risk seems plausible

Alexander's Horse · March 19, 2003, 00:16

Gassed British soldiers, World War 1. Cool makeshift bandages over their blind eyes.

Spiffor · March 19, 2003, 00:18

This bomb could look much cooler if only it was paint in a fancy colour
(current warfare, this is Grozny, again)

Eli · March 19, 2003, 03:14

Poor MiG goes down...

Dis · March 19, 2003, 03:18

wow! how did someone get that good of a picture? did the pilot eject? Actually I think I see his helmet. I think that has a second person too. I don't want to think where his helmet is...

MichaeltheGreat · March 19, 2003, 03:34

Quote:

Originally posted by Zylka
mmmk

I just vaguely remember stories of a British cruiser/destroyer being sunk off of Argentina by a single exeter missle

Granted battleships have much heavier hulls... but the risk seems plausible

The missile you're thinking of is the French-made Exocet, which was used to sink / damage several British frigates or destroyers. In those cases, shipboard fires, plus large holes near the waterline did a lot of damage, but the Exocet couldn't even penetrate battleship armor (above the waterline, you're talking around 18" vs. about 2"

The largest ship lost (and the major loss of life in the Falklands) was the Argentinean cruiser General Belgrano, which was a WW-2 vintage US cruiser sold to Argentina after WW2. It had no ASW capability, no escort, and was operating where British subs were known to be operation. Sheer stupidity, and three torpedo hits in rapid succession made for a very fast sinking, and some 500 men lost.

The four battleships (four Iowa class) recommisioned by Reagan for the cold war were pretty quickly decommissioned - not only did you have the direct cost of operating them, but they needed to have battle groups built around them to give them fleet air defense and anti-submarine protection. Their shore bombardment range is too limited, and it was too much cost (and too little effiency) to refit the gun turrets with Tomahawk launchers.

The final fatal problem happened with the turret #2 explosion on the USS Iowa - the 16 inch main guns haven't been made for decades, nor does anyone make their ordnance, so once it was found the ordance had problems, the ships were just SOL.

Asher · March 19, 2003, 03:37

Quote:

Originally posted by Dissident
couldn't resist. See, we have been on the recieving end of war.

Still sends chills down my spine...

Asher · March 19, 2003, 03:38

Quote:

Originally posted by SlowwHand

Alcatraz is a prison off San Francisco, Diss.
You never heard of Alcatraz ? As in Birdman of... ?

Alcatraz is awesome...I've toured it about four times now, still fascinated with it.

Dis · March 19, 2003, 03:43

I also seen that in the movie: So i married an Axe murderer

You can call me Vicki

In any case I was on an LPH. I posted a picture earlier. These ships are their replacement. Much bigger and has the capability of deploying boats.

LSD's were also part of the battle group

Dis · March 19, 2003, 03:49

These are cruisers. The amount of work I've done on them is extensive. Even though I was only at SIMA (Shore Intermediate Maintenance Activity) for about a year in Mississippi. Everything above the main deck is made of aluminum. You don't want to be there if it gets hit by a missile. These ships are the anti-air and missile defense for battle groups. we had the Yorktown and Ticonderoga in Mississippi.

Hmm I can't find any pictures of the frigates that were stationed in MS. we had 3 of those ships stationed there.

Dis · March 19, 2003, 03:53

we had 3 of these aboard the USS Enterprise

and 2 of these. one on the port side, one on the starboard.

Those are the only permanent mounted weapons an aircraft carrier has. You can also mount .50 cal machine guns along various sponsons and such. Or the fantail. The marines liked firing their pretty guns from the fantail

. But I think the Enterprise got rid of their marine detachment. I guess they rely on the master at arms-Security division (I did TAD- temp active duty there for a while) or the gunners mates (for the machine guns) for ship defense against boarding and such.

Drake Tungsten · March 19, 2003, 03:57

USS Nebraska!

Dis · March 19, 2003, 04:00

bah!

USS Nevada. Only battleship to make it out of Pearl Harbour on Dec 7, 1941. Of course it was badly damged.

Nevada is the one that isn't capsized

perhaps they only got underway. It says it was beached by torpedo hits

A little history:

On 7 December 1941, Nevada was moored singly off Ford Island, and had a freedom of maneuver denied the other eight battleships present during the attack. As her gunners opened fire and her engineers got up steam, she was struck by one torpedo and two, possibly three, bombs from the Japanese attackers, but was able to get underway. While attempting to leave harbor she was struck again. Fearing she might sink in the channel, blocking it, she was beached at Hospital Point. Gutted forward, she lost 50 killed and 109 wounded.

Refloated 12 February 1942, Nevada repaired at Pearl Harbor and Puget Sound Navy Yard, then sailed for Alaska where she provided fire support for the capture of Attu 11 to 18 May. In June she sailed for further modernization at Norfolk Navy Yard, and in April 1944 reached British waters to prepare for the Normandy Invasion. In action from 6 to 17 June, and again 25 June, her mighty guns pounded not only permanent shore defenses on the Cherbourg Peninsula, but ranged as far as 17 miles inland, breaking up German concentrations and counterattacks. Shore batteries straddled her 27 times, but failed to diminish her accurate fire.

Between 15 August and 25 September, Nevada fired in the invasion of Southern France, dueling at Toulon with shore batteries of 13.4-inch guns taken from French battleships scuttled early in the war. Her gun barrels were relined at New York, and she sailed for the Pacific, arriving off Iwo Jima 16 February 1945 to give Marines invading and fighting ashore her massive gunfire support through 7 March.

On 24 March, Nevada massed off Okinawa with the mightiest naval force ever seen in the Pacific, as pre-invasion bombardment began. She pounded Japanese airfields, shore defenses, supply dumps, and troop concentrations through the crucial operation, although 11 men were killed and a main battery turret damaged when she was struck by a suicide plane 27 March. Another two men were lost to fire from a shore battery 5 April. Serving off Okinawa until 30 June, from 10 July to 7 August she ranged with the 3rd Fleet which not only bombed the Japanese home islands, but came within range for Nevada's guns during the closing days of the war.

Drake Tungsten · March 19, 2003, 04:04

Only current ships, dammit!

Don't make me break out the WWI-era shots of the old USS Nebraska...

Asher · March 19, 2003, 04:05

OH YEAH?
The HMCS Calgary

Drake Tungsten · March 19, 2003, 04:08

Asher · March 19, 2003, 04:14

At least it's better than the fearsome HMCS Goose Bay...

Drake Tungsten · March 19, 2003, 04:17

I wonder if the US Coast Guard could beat the Canadian Navy...

MtG? Got an answer to that?

Eli · March 19, 2003, 06:54

The Iraqi Navy :

Pekka · March 19, 2003, 07:01

Jeltz, I am absolutely sickened about that guerilla tent picture. Look at your camoflague! None! Just that net thrown over.. Absolutely sickening!

This is cool piece of AA stuff.

lightblue · March 19, 2003, 07:21

Dutch Royal Navy Minesweeper clearing up the mess in the Gulf...

lightblue · March 19, 2003, 07:23

The Goalkeeper close distance ship defense system:

Jeltz · March 19, 2003, 08:14

Quote:

Originally posted by Pekka
Jeltz, I am absolutely sickened about that guerilla tent picture. Look at your camoflague! None! Just that net thrown over.. Absolutely sickening!

This is cool piece of AA stuff.

That's a BUK, right?

The guerilla tent was the only picture I could find on the google image search, so I'm not responsible for the bad camo.

Pekka · March 19, 2003, 08:53

That's BUK yes.. it's nice piece of work. Though not the best in the market, but still pretty good. I like them. I should get one in my backyard, just to be sure.

Well you should be disgusted about the camo too. It was non existent! We can't send this kind of message to the world, since we are masters of camoflagueing and cold hearted killers!