Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 11,918
- Points
- 1,160
I suspect size does matter in a under the keel hit, it will limit the amount of injuries. Was the Belgarno a under the keel hit or a hull hit?
BTW Kirkhill, the ship in Navy Pete's video is in your favourite 2000 tons range. It's a derivative of the Leander class frigate.
Of course, the pictured hit is just there to drive home the amount of damage such a hit can cause. I say that because it is conducted as a test in perfect conditions : the sub is not under threat from anything, has all the time in the world, can move to optimum distance and sets a perfect center hit on a stopped target.
Real life, as an escort in an ASW scenario, you are maneuvering constantly at speed unless you are in the drift phase of the hunt - but even then you are moving (slowly) and have a tail streamed to get protection from such close shot and the sub knows this. So achieving a perfect under the middle of the ship hit is pretty difficult and a likely rare event even with a guided torpedo following its own sonar. I am not saying you wont be hit, just that the perfect shot is not the most likely hit (actually a hit in the screws is the most likely - not that it is much better).
HMS Belfast took a single mine beneath the keel and it damn near spelled the end of her war effort. If I recall, the keel was actually bentFor the larger vessels, a hull hit is probably better. An under the keel explosion would not do as much damage on a 6000 to 8000 tons destroyer, less on a cruiser and probably nowhere near as much under an aircraft carrier.
The limitation is that the upward force being exerted by the explosion is always the same. We all remember our physics: Force = Mass x Acceleration. Since the force is constant, the more mass your ship has, the lesser the "acceleration" being induced in the hull.
Thanks, I couldn't remember what it was called.
I think one big difference is previously torpedos hit the hull; now they blow up below you and the pressure bubble breaks your keel. Smarter people then me that specialize in that sort of thing just laugh at the idea of ships surviving a heavy weight torpedo shot, which is a typical sea training scenario for damage. Aside from breaking the ship, the blast wave would pulp everyone down below 3 deck, so don't really need to worrry about abandoning ship.
BTW Kirkhill, the ship in Navy Pete's video is in your favourite 2000 tons range. It's a derivative of the Leander class frigate.
Of course, the pictured hit is just there to drive home the amount of damage such a hit can cause. I say that because it is conducted as a test in perfect conditions : the sub is not under threat from anything, has all the time in the world, can move to optimum distance and sets a perfect center hit on a stopped target.
Real life, as an escort in an ASW scenario, you are maneuvering constantly at speed unless you are in the drift phase of the hunt - but even then you are moving (slowly) and have a tail streamed to get protection from such close shot and the sub knows this. So achieving a perfect under the middle of the ship hit is pretty difficult and a likely rare event even with a guided torpedo following its own sonar. I am not saying you wont be hit, just that the perfect shot is not the most likely hit (actually a hit in the screws is the most likely - not that it is much better).
SAN DIEGO —The U.S. Marine Corps will put a new type of missile-delivery drone to the test in an operational scenario this month, following a year of developmental work, according to a senior service official.
Lt. Gen. Karsten Heckl, the deputy commandant of the Marine Corps for combat development and integration, told reporters the service had been working on two autonomous, low-profile vessels, which resemble drug runners’ semi-submersible boats seen in Central America. The boats are designed to carry two Naval Strike Missiles to Marine units ashore, stealthily delivering their payload without attracting any attention.
“They’re very, very hard — if not downright impossible — to track,” Heckl told reporters after speaking on a panel at the WEST 2024 conference here hosted by the U.S. Naval Institute an AFCEA International. That is because the boats produce almost no wake while gliding through the water, he explained.
After working with a “mom and pop shop” to design and build the two craft, Heckl said the Marine Corps has demonstrated it can launch and recover them from the Navy’s Expeditionary Fast Transport vessels and the Marines’ Stern Landing Vessels.
This month, the Marines will demonstrate the full evolution of using these boats to resupply Marines ashore with the missiles they need to fire at ships from land.
A Navy Marine Expeditionary Ship Interdiction System launcher deploys into position aboard Pacific Missile Range Facility Barking Sands, Hawaii, Aug. 16, 2021. The NMESIS and its Naval Strike Missiles participated in a live-fire exercise, here, part of Large Scale Exercise 2021. (Maj. Nick Mannweiler/Marine Corps)
Heckl said the boats will play a role in the Army-led Project Convergence Capstone 4 event in California, featuring in a “multi-domain mobility corridor” phase of the exercise designed to test equipment for resupply and logistics missions.
Service tests so far have been “very successful,” he added, describing the price tag as so low that the craft can be deemed expendable if lost. If the Marine Corps does decide to pursue buying these in larger numbers, however, Heckl said the service will have to find a bigger contractor for production.
Seaspan
delivery of JSS #1 HMCS Protecteur in 2025
keel laying of JSS #2 HMCS Preserver in Oct 2023
OOSV to be launched this year
prototype block for CCGS Diefenbaker done/started
design review done with CCG on MPV
Irving
4th AOPS HMCS William Hall delivered 2 months early in August 2023
AOPS 5,6,7 under construction
AOPS 5 to be delivered 4 months early
ship 4 total 51 months
ship 5 total 39 months
CSC prototype design block July 2024
CSC # 1 construction to start in April 2025
Davie still hopes and dreams lol
Are warships built in the US and sold to other countries subject to the 30% FMS surcharge?Yup.
You cannot compare US ship building practices to anyone else. It is literally comparing Apples to Atom Bombs.
Are you buying from the shipyard directly or from the USN?Are warships built in the US and sold to other countries subject to the 30% FMS surcharge?
In this case, lets assume we are buying/ordering from a shipyard.Are you buying from the shipyard directly or from the USN?