[Newsbot]

Title: Pirates attack U.S.-flagged ship but fail to board
Category: Military
Posted By: bootlegga
Date: 2009-04-15 09:01:38

[martin14]

hmmmm, chicken pussy pirates

[saturn_656]

Hopefully this means it is now "open season" on the pirates.

[danimal]

all this pirate business is getting out of hand... yarrrrrgh!

[QBall]

Good, the ships need some more practice in shore bombardment. Time to move in and wipe out any town or village with a dock.

[saturn_656]

QBall QBall:

PDT_Armataz_01_40

Good, the ships need some more practice in shore bombardment. Time to move in and wipe out any town or village with a dock.

Most of our ships do not carry guns suitable for shore bombardment, you should at least have a 4.5 to 5 inch main gun for that task.

The Israelis have shown that the OTO 76mm (like those used on the 280's) can be used in a pinch, but it is far from ideal. Don't even think about trying to use the rinky dink 57mm on the 330's.

We need bigger guns.

[stokes]

saturn_656 saturn_656:

QBall QBall:

PDT_Armataz_01_40

Good, the ships need some more practice in shore bombardment. Time to move in and wipe out any town or village with a dock.

Most of our ships do not carry guns suitable for shore bombardment, you should at least have a 4.5 to 5 inch main gun for that task.

The Israelis have shown that the OTO 76mm (like those used on the 280's) can be used in a pinch, but it is far from ideal. Don't even think about trying to use the rinky dink 57mm on the 330's.

We need bigger guns.

We would use missiles more accurate and a bigger payload. The ideal ship for shore bombarment is the mighty Mo still tied alongside Pearl Harbor

[saturn_656]

stokes stokes:

We would use missiles more accurate and a bigger payload. The ideal ship for shore bombarment is the mighty Mo still tied alongside Pearl Harbor

So we are going to use a $500,000 missile (thats about what Tomahawks, the premier land attack missile, go for these days) to blow up some Somali pirate hut that ain't worth $50 bucks CDN?

5 inch guns are more cost effective, never mind that we don't have a ship capable of carrying the TLAM system

[stokes]

saturn_656 saturn_656:

stokes stokes:

We would use missiles more accurate and a bigger payload. The ideal ship for shore bombarment is the mighty Mo still tied alongside Pearl Harbor

So we are going to use a $500,000 missile (thats about what Tomahawks, the premier land attack missile, go for these days) to blow up some Somali pirate hut that ain't worth $50 bucks CDN?

5 inch guns are more cost effective, never mind that we don't have a ship capable of carrying the TLAM system

Yes we do, the missile launcher on the destroyers can carry every naval missile in the NATO arsenal including Tomahawks equipped with tactical nukes.

[saturn_656]

stokes stokes:

Yes we do, the missile launcher on the destroyers can carry every naval missile in the NATO arsenal including Tomahawks equipped with tactical nukes.

I'd be happy if we had someone in this thread who had served on the TRUMP conversions... anyway there are two main types of Mk.41, strike length and tactical length.

The TRUMPs have tactical length Mk.41, which are not deep enough to accomodate the tomahawk missile.