The Great Pirates off the Somali Coast thread

[Zissou]

Then there is the problem of what to do with them after you get done with the pirates, send them after Kilos?

The Caribbean, finally bring ole Jack Sparrow to justice.

 

[Flash]

So... our torps suck, or we just don't employ them / have no reason to and the skill as atrophied??

I am pretty certain that since the end of WWII there has only been one surface ship sunk by a submarine and one submarine sunk in combat, worldwide. The first to get both names right gets rep.

In the US Navy we no longer have anti-ship torpedoes that are carried by aircraft or surface ships, only anti-submarine ones, 'lightweight'. I am certain they could be used in an anti-surface ship role if so employed, but a missile would do a much better job. Only US submarines carry anti-ship/ASW torpedoes, 'heavyweight'.

'Lightweight' ASW torpedoes have a warhead of about 100lbs. 'Heavyweight' ASUW/ASW torpedoes have a warhead of about 650lbs.

MK 48 'Heavyweight' Torpedo

MK 50 'Lightweight' Torpedo

 

[Flash]

The Caribbean, finally bring ole Jack Sparrow to justice.

Quit trying to bring levity to this discussion, it is not appreciated.

 

[Gatordev]

I am pretty certain that since the end of WWII there has only been one surface ship sunk by a submarine and one submarine sunk in combat, worldwide. The first to get both names right gets rep.

In the US Navy we no longer have anti-ship torpedoes that are carried by aircraft or surface ships, only anti-submarine ones, 'lightweight'. I am certain they could be used in an anti-surface ship role if so employed, but a missile would do a much better job. Only US submarines carry anti-ship/ASW torpedoes, 'heavyweight'.

'Lightweight' ASW torpedoes have a warhead of about 100lbs. 'Heavyweight' ASUW/ASW torpedoes have a warhead of about 650lbs.

MK 48 'Heavyweight' Torpedo

MK 50 'Lightweight' Torpedo

Not completely true as far as the torp capabilities (which is different than user employment abilities). Obviously there's no need to go into details, but the MK 50 and it's younger brother the MK 54 is quite capable of going after surface contacts. While both lightweight, the size of the warhead is not always the telling factor of the damage it can impart (as you no doubt can read about).

Of course, I'm basing this off of airborne employment. Firing one off the midships of a FFG is probably not the best way to tactically employ them. It's far easier to just bring in a -60x w/ a GAU or AGM to remove the problem.

 

[A4sForever]

.....'Lightweight' ASW torpedoes have a warhead of about 100lbs. 'Heavyweight' ASUW/ASW torpedoes have a warhead of about 650lbs ....

100# warhead??? 650# warhead???

Naaaaaa ... those aren't torpedoes ...

Now THESE .... THESE are torpedoes .... try up to 3400# of H.E. ....


Kaiten Type 1. Tokyo Yasukuni War Memorial Museum

Japanese Type 93 "Long Lance" torpedo

Japanese Torpedoes

Kaiten human torpedo conversion from a Type 93

 

[eddie]

^^^

AKA,

The reason Eddie so Freudianly LOVES torpedoes...

 

[nittany03]

I am pretty certain that since the end of WWII there has only been one surface ship sunk by a submarine and one submarine sunk in combat, worldwide. The first to get both names right gets rep.

Surface ship . . .ARA General Belgrano, formerly USS Phoenix. Sunk during the Falklands war by HMS Conqueror.

Submarine . . . PNS Ghazi, formerly USS Diablo. My grandfather served on her during/just after WWII.

 

[A4sForever]

I am pretty certain that since the end of WWII there has only been one surface ship sunk by a submarine and one submarine sunk in combat, worldwide. The first to get both names right gets rep.

Well ... so much for certainty ... as there was actually another surface ship sunk ... a USN one ... regrettably.

USS OKLAHOMA CITY (CL-91/CLG-5/CG-5) ... sunk in RIMPAC '99 by a stinkin' ROK submarine.

"The ship was still afloat on the final day of the exercise. With USS Columbus (SSN-762), Republic of Korea Submarine Lee Chun (SS 062), and several attack aircraft in position to take another shot at the old vessel, the Lee Chun shot a torpedo, scoring a direct hit. Twenty-five minutes later, at approximately 11:03 a.m., the former Seventh Fleet flagship disappeared below the surface, sinking down in 6,000 feet of water."

USS OLKLAHOMA CITY (CLG-5) in better times ... Hong Kong harbor, 1974

 

[lmnop]

I am pretty certain that since the end of WWII there has only been one surface ship sunk by a submarine and one submarine sunk in combat, worldwide.

In addition to the others listed above, the PNS/M HANGOR (Sub) sank the INS KHUKRI (Frigate) in '71 during the Indo-Pakistani conflict and the USS BREMERTON (SSN 698) sank the NEW CARISSA with a MK 48 in 1999.

 

[Flash]

In addition to the others listed above, the PNS/M HANGOR (Sub) sank the INS KHUKRI (Frigate) in '71 during the Indo-Pakistani conflict and the USS BREMERTON (SSN 698) sank the NEW CARISSA with a MK 48 in 1999.

I thought I was missing one, thanks.

And by the way, I said in combat! There have been plenty of ships sunk in exercises and tests, only the three listed above in combat since WWII.

 

[Flash]

Not completely true as far as the torp capabilities (which is different than user employment abilities). Obviously there's no need to go into details, but the MK 50 and it's younger brother the MK 54 is quite capable of going after surface contacts. While both lightweight, the size of the warhead is not always the telling factor of the damage it can impart (as you no doubt can read about).

Of course, I'm basing this off of airborne employment. Firing one off the midships of a FFG is probably not the best way to tactically employ them. It's far easier to just bring in a -60x w/ a GAU or AGM to remove the problem.

I know they could, but they are not normally utilized that way from what I have seen. Missiles and guns are much better suited, but if given the chance I am sure a HS/HSL type or a SWO would be happy to use one.

I was trying to be somewhat general for the greater audience.

 

[eddie]

I know they could, but they are not normally utilized that way from what I have seen. Missiles and guns are much better suited, but if given the chance I am sure a HS/HSL type or a SWO would be happy to use one.

I was trying to be somewhat general for the greater audience.

Eddie wants everyone to be as specific as legality and better discression will allow!!!! Even if that means he won't understand a damn thing. Yes, and yes, the third person is my absolute favorite...

(Clearly, I am a Chicom spy)

 

[A4sForever]

....And by the way, I said in combat!....

Actually ... you said: "I am pretty certain that since the end of WWII there has only been one surface ship sunk by a submarine and one submarine sunk in combat, worldwide."

Which is easily read:

1. ...since the end of WWII there has only been one surface ship sunk by a submarine...

2. ...and one submarine sunk in combat, worldwide.

And that's how I read it ... :sleep_125

 

[Flash]

Actually ... you said......

And that's how I read it ... :sleep_125

Okay, okay, you got me. I should have composed the sentence better.

 

[zippy]

When? During the Barbary Wars? And do you realize how few ships we have nowadays? It is not like we have 4 or 5 FFG/DDG/CG's to spare for a few months to go chase after thugs in in skiffs shooting up ships with AK-47's and RPG's.

Well, this time last year- and even today... According to open sources we have six warships sitting there... I know you are good at looking stuff up, you could do a quick search and find news articles from recent years about the Somali pirates and our Navy's interactions.

Flash, whether you think its important or not pirate activity in that part of the world is something that we send assets to cover. Sometimes that means parking a DDG or 3 (yes, I've actually seen three sitting right off the shore there- with several other ships steaming in circles a little farther out) off the coast to encourage the release of hostages and vessels. I really don't forsee this changing in the near future.