Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
RoofGardener

Trump authorises Navy to sink Iranian gunboat

83 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

and then
On 4/24/2020 at 12:54 AM, Captain Risky said:

Trump wants to go to war over harassing ? 

I don't recall him saying anything about "going to war".  That is simply YOUR interpretation of his statement.  He said he'd given the Navy authority to sink any vessels that harassed them.  Are you really unaware that you are making assumptions based on your own interpretation and ascribing it to HIM?  It just comes so naturally, after years of practice, that you aren't even aware of reality vs your opinions any longer.

Also, there is no confirmation that their satellite was successfully inserted into a stable orbit nor that the payload was even an active, functioning sensor platform.  It could be, Lord knows they've worked on the tech long enough.  I don't think the U.S. president needs to lose any sleep that the Iranians are going to surpass our technical capabilities any time soon.  But hey, if it gives you pleasure to paint dire pictures of imminent U.S. demise before the mighty IRGC and its dress wearing leaders, go for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Truman show
2 hours ago, and then said:

I don't recall him saying anything about "going to war".  That is simply YOUR interpretation of his statement.  He said he'd given the Navy authority to sink any vessels that harassed them.  Are you really unaware that you are making assumptions based on your own interpretation and ascribing it to HIM?  It just comes so naturally, after years of practice, that you aren't even aware of reality vs your opinions any longer.

Oh well if you start shooting at someone they'll shoot back. Tomato, tomato. 

2 hours ago, and then said:

Also, there is no confirmation that their satellite was successfully inserted into a stable orbit nor that the payload was even an active, functioning sensor platform.  It could be, Lord knows they've worked on the tech long enough.  I don't think the U.S. president needs to lose any sleep that the Iranians are going to surpass our technical capabilities any time soon.  But hey, if it gives you pleasure to paint dire pictures of imminent U.S. demise before the mighty IRGC and its dress wearing leaders, go for it.

No there is not any sign that they worked or didn't thou it was enough for Trump to have a brain fart over. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
21 hours ago, Captain Risky said:

No there is not any sign that they worked or didn't

I see, yet you've concluded, from your anonymous sources that Trump is lashing out in a crazy way.  Remember when you used to exercise logic and discernment rather than just demanding that everyone else agree with your OPINIONS?  I think some call that "magical thinking".  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener

Well, I for one would LOVE to see the Islamic Republican Guard lose a bevy of speedboats. Maybe it would stop them issuing endless bloodthirsty threats against the West and teach them a little.. well.. not humility exactly, but a better understanding of what endless threats will get them. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
On 4/28/2020 at 6:33 AM, RoofGardener said:

Well, I for one would LOVE to see the Islamic Republican Guard lose a bevy of speedboats. Maybe it would stop them issuing endless bloodthirsty threats against the West and teach them a little.. well.. not humility exactly, but a better understanding of what endless threats will get them. 

I imagine there are a LOT of young sailors out there, gunner's mates especially, who'd like the opportunity to practice their skills on the guys who are trying to make their lives miserable.  Asymmetric warfare can be seriously deadly but I suspect those boat swarms will find that both sides have a way of "innovating" where killing the enemy is concerned.  If the grand wizard dragon of all mooges decides to kill some U.S. sailors, he needs to know he's a target as well.  He can't dig a hole deep enough to hide in forever.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
5 hours ago, and then said:

I imagine there are a LOT of young sailors out there, gunner's mates especially, who'd like the opportunity to practice their skills on the guys who are trying to make their lives miserable.  Asymmetric warfare can be seriously deadly but I suspect those boat swarms will find that both sides have a way of "innovating" where killing the enemy is concerned.  If the grand wizard dragon of all mooges decides to kill some U.S. sailors, he needs to know he's a target as well.  He can't dig a hole deep enough to hide in forever.

Hah... indeed ! 

I don't know what the US Navy boats are equipped with, but the Royal Navy Type 23 frigates have an automatic radar-slaved rapid-fire 30mm canon that would make mincemeat of these motor boats ! 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DarkHunter
16 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

Hah... indeed ! 

I don't know what the US Navy boats are equipped with, but the Royal Navy Type 23 frigates have an automatic radar-slaved rapid-fire 30mm canon that would make mincemeat of these motor boats ! 

For guns American destroyers have a single 5 inch gun, one or two phalanx CIWs depending on if it's a 51 or 85 model, and two 25 mm bushmasters.  As for cruiser's and their guns they got two 5 inch guns,  two 25 mm guns, two to four 50 caliber machine guns, and two phalanx CIWs.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
16 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

Hah... indeed ! 

I don't know what the US Navy boats are equipped with, but the Royal Navy Type 23 frigates have an automatic radar-slaved rapid-fire 30mm canon that would make mincemeat of these motor boats ! 

I think it might be a bit more of a challenge.  I have a degree of respect for the tactical abilities of a crazy enemy.  If I were using such boats, I'd probably pack a few hundred pounds of C4 in the bow and have some kind of launch system for heavy RPGs.  I'd swarm dozens of them at once, under cover of darkness and I'd swarm them from all points of the compass.

Make no mistake, if they decide to damage a U.S.vessel and kill sailors, they'll most likely achieve that goal.  They understand that but I think they also understand that such a victory would shortly cost them every major surface vessel in their Navy and the savaging of their infrastructure along the entire coast of the Straits.  It wouldn't be an.."equitable trade".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
8 hours ago, DarkHunter said:

For guns American destroyers have a single 5 inch gun, one or two phalanx CIWs depending on if it's a 51 or 85 model, and two 25 mm bushmasters.  As for cruiser's and their guns they got two 5 inch guns,  two 25 mm guns, two to four 50 caliber machine guns, and two phalanx CIWs.

Hmm.. I don't believe that the Phalanx can be used against surface targets, only aeriel ones ? A 5" gun might have difficulty tracking a fast-moving/swerving motorboat ? The 50-calibre are presumably man-operated, and would surely only be useful at VERY close range. The Bushmasters - if they are radar slaved - would be devastating, however. 

7 hours ago, and then said:

I think it might be a bit more of a challenge.  I have a degree of respect for the tactical abilities of a crazy enemy.  If I were using such boats, I'd probably pack a few hundred pounds of C4 in the bow and have some kind of launch system for heavy RPGs.  I'd swarm dozens of them at once, under cover of darkness and I'd swarm them from all points of the compass.

Make no mistake, if they decide to damage a U.S.vessel and kill sailors, they'll most likely achieve that goal.  They understand that but I think they also understand that such a victory would shortly cost them every major surface vessel in their Navy and the savaging of their infrastructure along the entire coast of the Straits.  It wouldn't be an.."equitable trade".

Hmm.. if the target ship was moving, then a swarm of motorboats might have difficulty synchronising an attack like that, and getting within a few hundred yards to use RPG's. In addition, they would show up on the ships radar even at night.  

Some of these larger "motorboats" are equipped with C801 anti-ship missiles, which is an EXTREMELY dangerous missile. The smaller ones have an MLRS system. It is unguided but - at rangers within a mile.. it MIGHT hit a naval ship. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DarkHunter
5 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

Hmm.. I don't believe that the Phalanx can be used against surface targets, only aeriel ones ? A 5" gun might have difficulty tracking a fast-moving/swerving motorboat ? The 50-calibre are presumably man-operated, and would surely only be useful at VERY close range. The Bushmasters - if they are radar slaved - would be devastating, however. 

The navy requested a few years ago that smart shells for the 5 inch guns be developed that would have a proximity fuse and be able to spread shrapnel over a wide area to counter small quick targets, whether they ever developed and fielded them or not I'm not sure.

The Phalanx on ships are normally able to be fired extremely low to counter sea skimming missiles so while not for it's intended purpose and having to deal with range and probably targeting issues in an emergency they could in theory be used.  Depending on the model used the phalanx can depress its angle of fire by either 10, 20, or 25 degrees.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
3 hours ago, DarkHunter said:

The navy requested a few years ago that smart shells for the 5 inch guns be developed that would have a proximity fuse and be able to spread shrapnel over a wide area to counter small quick targets, whether they ever developed and fielded them or not I'm not sure.

The Phalanx on ships are normally able to be fired extremely low to counter sea skimming missiles so while not for it's intended purpose and having to deal with range and probably targeting issues in an emergency they could in theory be used.  Depending on the model used the phalanx can depress its angle of fire by either 10, 20, or 25 degrees.

The "fragmentation" shells sound useful. (they could also assist in anti-air and anti-missile defence at a pinch). 

I think the problem with Phallanx is not so much the mechanical limits of the device, but the software ? It would struggle to identify a slow target (less than 60MPH as a valid target ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DarkHunter
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

The "fragmentation" shells sound useful. (they could also assist in anti-air and anti-missile defence at a pinch). 

I think the problem with Phallanx is not so much the mechanical limits of the device, but the software ? It would struggle to identify a slow target (less than 60MPH as a valid target ? 

Couldnt fire any articles on phalanx being able to target speed boats but this video does show a phalanx shooting at a decently slow moving target boat so in theory it could work but its definitely not the best option.

The US navy was working on various shell types to target missiles, aircrafts, and other targets to increase the usefulness of the 5 inch gun and in 2018 or 2019 they tested new hyper velocity rounds.  How far along in testing and fielding I got no idea but they do seem to be working on improvements.

Edited by DarkHunter
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener

Hmm.. I dunno @DarkHunter. I suspect that video has been edited ? If that WAS a radar-guided point defence Phallanx, then the initial fall of shot around the speedboat was lamentably bad. I mean... you could hardly expect to shoot down an inbound anti-ship missile with THAT ! In addition, the fall of shot was suspiciously broad. 

I suspect that somebody has intercut pictures of the Phallanx firing, with shots of a general purpose machine gun (human-operated) firing on the speedboat. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DarkHunter
5 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

Hmm.. I dunno @DarkHunter. I suspect that video has been edited ? If that WAS a radar-guided point defence Phallanx, then the initial fall of shot around the speedboat was lamentably bad. I mean... you could hardly expect to shoot down an inbound anti-ship missile with THAT ! In addition, the fall of shot was suspiciously broad. 

I suspect that somebody has intercut pictures of the Phallanx firing, with shots of a general purpose machine gun (human-operated) firing on the speedboat. 

Took awhile but this article does mention how the newest model of phalanx with the newest radar guidance system is used to counter small fast attack boats.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wearethemighty.com/amp/navy-ship-defense-weapon-upgraded-to-destroy-small-boats-2554833777

Seems the newest radar configuration instead of just using radar also has a FLIR sensor which would be used to target slower moving threats.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
preacherman76
On ‎4‎/‎24‎/‎2020 at 1:59 AM, Captain Risky said:

Pentagon Walks Back Trump’s Twitter Outburst On Iran

Faced with the new challenges of a crumbling economy and the worst coronavirus outbreak in the world, the Trump administration appears to be returning to old grievances.

On Wednesday, U.S. President Donald Trump wrote on Twitter, “I have instructed the United States Navy to shoot down and destroy any and all Iranian gunboats if they harass our ships at sea.” U.S. defense officials were reportedly surprised by the tweet, as they had not been briefed on any change in policy toward Iran.

In response, the Pentagon sought to manage up, downgrading the commander-in-chief’s announcement to a warning. “What he was emphasizing is all of our ships retain the right of self-defense, and people need to be very careful in their interactions to understand the inherent right of self-defense,” David Norquist, U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense, said at a Pentagon press briefing. Norquist added that the president’s tweet was “very useful.”

https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/04/23/pentagon-waters-down-trump-iran-satellite-missile-warship-threat-warning/

Doesn't sound like a walk back at all. Sounds like exactly what he meant. They will defend themselves.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
4 hours ago, DarkHunter said:

Took awhile but this article does mention how the newest model of phalanx with the newest radar guidance system is used to counter small fast attack boats.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wearethemighty.com/amp/navy-ship-defense-weapon-upgraded-to-destroy-small-boats-2554833777

Seems the newest radar configuration instead of just using radar also has a FLIR sensor which would be used to target slower moving threats.

Well, if that is the case, then this is 'death on a stick' for a small-boat swarm attack :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then

I saw this referenced on a blog and wondered if anyone else had seen this in the news?  I'd say this is slightly more important than the stupidity that's being spewed these days.

https://www.dailysabah.com/syrian-crisis/2020/01/26/us-forces-block-russian-convoy-for-fourth-time-in-8-days-amid-tension-over-syrian-oil-fields

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DarkHunter
32 minutes ago, and then said:

I saw this referenced on a blog and wondered if anyone else had seen this in the news?  I'd say this is slightly more important than the stupidity that's being spewed these days.

https://www.dailysabah.com/syrian-crisis/2020/01/26/us-forces-block-russian-convoy-for-fourth-time-in-8-days-amid-tension-over-syrian-oil-fields

I heard about it before, not too long ago there was a video showing an American convoy running a Russian convoy off the road when it tried to pass them.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
8 hours ago, and then said:

I saw this referenced on a blog and wondered if anyone else had seen this in the news?  I'd say this is slightly more important than the stupidity that's being spewed these days.

https://www.dailysabah.com/syrian-crisis/2020/01/26/us-forces-block-russian-convoy-for-fourth-time-in-8-days-amid-tension-over-syrian-oil-fields

Hmm.. that IS worrying. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
joc
On 5/5/2020 at 3:35 AM, RoofGardener said:

Hmm.. that IS worrying. 

 

Damn right it is!  Anyone messing with the Romulans is worrying...very, worrying.

The move came amid an ongoing dispute between the U.S. and Russia over the Rumeylan oil field in northeast Al-Hasakah, marking the fourth time such a standoff has reported in the last eight days

   Why exactly are we protecting the Romulan oil fields?  Why don't they just put a 'force field' around them? smh

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
4 hours ago, joc said:

 

Damn right it is!  Anyone messing with the Romulans is worrying...very, worrying.

The move came amid an ongoing dispute between the U.S. and Russia over the Rumeylan oil field in northeast Al-Hasakah, marking the fourth time such a standoff has reported in the last eight days

   Why exactly are we protecting the Romulan oil fields?  Why don't they just put a 'force field' around them? smh

It was mandated under the Kittimar accords. We have to protect the oil fields against the Russians. In return, Checkof is promoted to leading midshipsman ! 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
joc
On 5/4/2020 at 9:10 AM, DarkHunter said:

Took awhile but this article does mention how the newest model of phalanx with the newest radar guidance system is used to counter small fast attack boats.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wearethemighty.com/amp/navy-ship-defense-weapon-upgraded-to-destroy-small-boats-2554833777

Seems the newest radar configuration instead of just using radar also has a FLIR sensor which would be used to target slower moving threats.

Not to mention...but I mention anyway...phalanx is just one weapon of many...the LAWS is also capable of taking out very fast boats as well as missiles with pin-point accuracy.

You can see both of these weapons aboard this USS Ponce in the demonstration LAWS video about 20 seconds in...we have the capability of taking out just the engine if we wanted:

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
7 hours ago, joc said:

Not to mention...but I mention anyway...phalanx is just one weapon of many...the LAWS is also capable of taking out very fast boats as well as missiles with pin-point accuracy.

You can see both of these weapons aboard this USS Ponce in the demonstration LAWS video about 20 seconds in...we have the capability of taking out just the engine if we wanted:

 

 

ROFL... perhaps in 3-4 years time. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DarkHunter
Posted (edited)

Not particularly on the topic at hand but tangentially related.

Trump might not need to sink the Iranian navy as they are apparently sinking themselves.  Havent been able to get the clearest information on exactly what happened but it seems an Iranian frigate accidentally fired at antiship missile at another Iranian frigate, so far 23 bodies have been recovered with 40 still missing.  

Conspiracy theories about this being part of a cyber attack or some coup attempt have already started but neither is likely.

I feel like I should mention that there is conflicting information on exactly what happened so the information will probably change, heard anything from a frigate or missile craft fired at a frigate, missile craft, or logistic ship with the death toll being anywhere from about 15 to over 40.

Edited by DarkHunter
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
joc
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

ROFL... perhaps in 3-4 years time. 

 

(CNN)In the sometimes hostile waters of the Persian Gulf looms the US Navy's first -- in fact, the world's first -- active laser weapon.

The LaWS, an acronym for Laser Weapons System, is not science fiction. It is not experimental. It is deployed on board the USS Ponce amphibious transport ship, ready to be fired at targets today and every day by Capt. Christopher Wells and his crew.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The LaWS is designed to be used against low-end asymmetric threats. Scalable power levels allow it to be used on low-power to dazzle a person's eye to non-lethally make them turn away from a threatening posture, and increase to 30 thousand watts (30 kW) to fry sensors, burn out motors, and detonate explosive materials. Against a vital point on small UAVs, one can be shot down in as little as two seconds. When facing small boats, the laser would target a craft's motor to disable it and make it "dead in the water," then repeating this against others in rapid succession, requiring only a few seconds of firing per boat. Targeting the platform is more effective than individual crewmembers, although the LaWS is accurate enough to target explosive rockets if on board, whose detonations could kill the operators. Against a larger aircraft like a helicopter, LaWS can burn through some vital components to cause it to fall and crash.[3]
Edited by joc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.