Tweet
639mpa, your picture wont come up but tell us what you know or "youll walk the plank matey!!"
-
IT TAKES GREAT INTELLIGENCE TO FAKE SUCH STUPIDITY! -
I SPY something! What the heck kind of mast is that???!!!IT TAKES GREAT INTELLIGENCE TO FAKE SUCH STUPIDITY!Comment
-
Blowpipe derived submarineized (is that a word?) AA missile system. A nasty surprise for ASW aircraft.
"Here ... dip this!".
David,Who is John Galt?Comment
-
I read about that a couple of weeks ago but didnt realize that I had a picture of it until yesterday. My understanding was that it worked well but was never repeated.IT TAKES GREAT INTELLIGENCE TO FAKE SUCH STUPIDITY!Comment
-
The Germans are working a similar system for their next batch of 212s. Others have rumored capabilities. In principle this should be easy. In practice, maybe not so much... What are you going to give up to get the space (and money) for the system? Can you keep the missiles dry? Can these be reliably employed? Do you really need them?
As somebody whose experience is on the seeker end of the system, something like that would give me pause, since the nominal 3 mile range means I can't maintain stand-off and launch a torp. On the other hand, if I've got Hellfire, I can probably hit the launcher and make a pretty big boom.
In that kind of game, reaction time matters. The sub is quiet and the aircraft is noisy. So I'd expect the sub to have the advantage in starting the engagement. On the other hand, once that big box pops up on radar, the game changes and it becomes a race.
The sub captain's trade off is his stealth for a chance that the missile system will work as intended. If it does work, fine. One threat eliminated, but you've created a flaming datum, too. If it doesn't work, you've exposed yourself to multiple attack vectors. Stealth has far fewer risks and creates more options. If you bypass the helo and get the ship, you get the helo, too. The sea gets mighty big when your landing pad heads to Davy Jones.
Maybe the best use for the system is when a sub is surfaced and not in a position to submerge. Few trade-offs in that scenario. It could also be of use to buy time to get submerged. But I don't see much use for the system in duck hunting...Last edited by Outrider; 08-05-2011, 08:34 AM.Comment
-
I agree. All a submarines work should be done underwater. Now if you could have a air defence weapon that could be fired from underwater then you could install it so that it would deploy from small vertical launch tubes.IT TAKES GREAT INTELLIGENCE TO FAKE SUCH STUPIDITY!Comment
-
Contractors have been trying to get a self-guiding AA weapon out of a 3" signal ejectors for years -- nutt'n yet. Here's how it would work:
You hear the not so friendly whap-whap of rotor wash on water; launch a weapon (equipped with a timer), let it bob to the surface; meanwhile you race out of Dodge; the thing launches and looks around with IR or radar, and takes out Mr. ASW helicopter. While all this was going on you sent an ADCAP off to visit the choppers home base.
Sounds good on paper.
David,Who is John Galt?Comment
-
I SPY SOMETHING INCREDIBLE! Could this be a long sought out photo of a Skipjack prop photo?IT TAKES GREAT INTELLIGENCE TO FAKE SUCH STUPIDITY!Comment
-
That's a 616/640 class boat. But, the propeller is the same one used on the SKIPJACK's in later years. Pictured is the same type wheel used on all the boats that employed the S5W plant.
David,Who is John Galt?Comment
-
David,
I do believe that that is a first flight 688 tailend there, that telltale slapped on thinline tow tube gives it away. Then again I could be wrong..........
TimLast edited by NavyICman; 08-12-2011, 05:09 PM.Comment
-
So Dave, your saying that its the stern of a Lafayette?IT TAKES GREAT INTELLIGENCE TO FAKE SUCH STUPIDITY!Comment
-
Nope.
Note the fixed vertical stabilizer under the upper rudder -- only the SSBN's had those. And no 688 had Zincs. IC'men run current through wet electrodes and anodes on the 688's -- a counter EMF to neutralize ion travel between bronze and steel
See the zincs on this boat, between the horizontal stabilizers and rudders?
It's a Boomer. Not a 688.Who is John Galt?Comment
-
Dave,
Three 88's under my belt and they all had zincs on the tail. 2 first flights (704, 710) and a 688I (764), drydocked all of them. The VA (brought this one outta PSA drydock) I am on has the ICCP system you described. and I don't see a vertical stabilizer in the shot. I do see the lines for SHT panels though and 640 class boomers never had SHT.
688 not a BOOMER :)
TimComment
-
I stand corrected on the 688 zincs -- you're right there, they had 'em. Should have looked at my drawings before spouting off about that.
However, the picture above is a Boomer.
I was one of the two Boat Diver's on the Webster Blue crew. Security swims means working the stern, so I know the territory. That thin-wire fairing leading from hull to horizontal stabilizer on the port side is like the one on the Webster (616 class). That's an S5W wheel back there, not a 688 prop.
Your move.Who is John Galt?Comment
-
Okay Dave,
I am gonna concede on this reason here. Upon further investigation of the above photo, the water line draft markings on the rudder are too far aft to be a 688. You are correct in your statements, and I did enjoy the healthy debate and the research involved. This is what keeps things lively. This former IC man now Nav ET (gaggg) can still be taught new tricks!
TimComment
Comment