Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Dark Skies

Thanks for the info. That would explain why the damage was minimal.

I dunno about the shock. It was my understanding that even shipboard (as opposed to land based) anti-missile countermeasures were iffy to a degree. I'd think the shock would be that Hezbollah's got a weapon that needs such extensive support and technilogical know-how.

Even so, if the C802 (or whatever its desgnation is)is based on the Styx, I would've thought that the Israelis would have a countermeasure for that. After all, the destroyer Eilat was sunk by a Styx in '67.


93 posted on 07/15/2006 6:23:20 AM PDT by Constantine XI Palaeologus ("Vicisti, Galilaee")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies ]


To: Constantine XI Palaeologus
I dunno about the shock. It was my understanding that even shipboard (as opposed to land based) anti-missile countermeasures were iffy to a degree. I'd think the shock would be that Hezbollah's got a weapon that needs such extensive support and technological know-how.

After doing a little digging, I tend to agree with you. It seems the CIWS (and I'm not sure this ship had that system) has never actually prevented a missile strike in a military conflict.

110 posted on 07/15/2006 6:54:24 AM PDT by Dark Skies
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson