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

Skip to comments.

First pictures of stricken IDF Navy, Saar 5 vessel, hit by Iranian missile
photobucket.com ^ | July 15, 2006 | Jeff Head

Posted on 07/15/2006 3:20:15 PM PDT by Jeff Head

Here are the first pictures I am aware of of the damaghed IDF Naval vessel, the Saar 5. Fron these pictures, it is clear that the ship was hit at an angle that would have allowed the CIWS to engage if it was active. I am now leaning towards the systems not being engaged at the time of attack.

IMHO, if true, as some reports have indicated today (buit that I did not want to believe), it would be a fatal and inexcusable mistake in the environment the vessel found itself in...defending other IDF gunboats against air attack during shore bombardment.

Please see the following FR thread for much more discussion and assessment:

Initial assessment of C-802 missile engagment against IDF Saar 5


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: 2006meconflict; chinesethreat; idf; insspear; iranianthreat; islamicthreat; israel; israelinavy; israelnavy; navy; saar5; ssm; waratsea; waronterror; wot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 221-231 next last
To: Eastbound

WILCO. I do not believe these are pics of battle damage at all at this point. My source is mistaken IMHO. But the thread is very good all the same. Lots of good knowledge and discussion here.


161 posted on 07/15/2006 7:38:11 PM PDT by Jeff Head (God, family, country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: Southack
See my post 142. Same question to you.
162 posted on 07/15/2006 7:39:34 PM PDT by Jeff Head (God, family, country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head
Good evening, and thanks for the pics.

I trust you are doing well.

5.56mm

163 posted on 07/15/2006 7:40:00 PM PDT by M Kehoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: M Kehoe
Thank my friends...I am.

This is a great thread. Lots of good discussion and info. See my post 142 I am doubting these are battle damage pics at all.

164 posted on 07/15/2006 7:41:32 PM PDT by Jeff Head (God, family, country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

Jeff if one hit the ship we are seeing it was topside and went through the deck. That alone would do significant damage to a limited area accounting for the stained discharged ports. If it didn't detonate it still could have wreaked a few hours havoc on support systems. The could have taken a hit that still left them mission capable. If they used hull numbers this would help a lot LOL. I know what water Discharge ports look like and what Ventilation ports look like. That one is for water or sewage etc. Ships use sea water for many operations as they eliminate the need for air cooled radiators, Condensers, and other equipment that would be air cooled. Heat on a ship especially one with electronics is not a welcomed thing. We even used water cooled condensers on our ice makers.


165 posted on 07/15/2006 7:42:00 PM PDT by cva66snipe (If it was wrong for Clinton why do some support it for Bush? Party over nation destroys the nation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head
"Notice the marks next to the small hole just forward of the helo deck which we think or thought is damage form the hit. That hole looks exactly the same size as the discharge hole forward of it at the water-line, making me think maybe that is a discharge hole with some staining, and not a damage hole at all."

That does not look like a damage hole to me, but rather an exhaust port. However, the soot is in **front** of the hole, indicating that fire came out of that port with the ship moving little if at all.

Otherwise, the soot would be behind the exhaust port.

166 posted on 07/15/2006 7:43:16 PM PDT by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head
Good to hear. I also enjoyed your analysis of the silkworm (C802 or something).

5.56mm

167 posted on 07/15/2006 7:43:39 PM PDT by M Kehoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: cva66snipe
Thanks my friend. I had a great tour of my son-in-laws nuke a few weeks ago. Got to see a lot...and was on board for 2 1/2 hours. They treated me really well. What a treat it was.

I am doubting that these particular pics are post battle damage at this point...but we shall see. I believe good pics will be forthcoming from Haifa during daylight hours over there.

168 posted on 07/15/2006 7:44:56 PM PDT by Jeff Head (God, family, country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: Southack

There are stains forward and aft in the orignal pics. Now, see post 146. That's a pic that is definitely not related to yesterday's action.


169 posted on 07/15/2006 7:47:41 PM PDT by Jeff Head (God, family, country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: Klutz Dohanger; Southack
Interesting. Maybe Southack's scenario is workable here. The Israeli ship blew the incoming to pieces, but the other missile hit the Egyptian ship, which may have been mistaken for another Israeli ship. Really baaaaaaad luck!
170 posted on 07/15/2006 7:50:15 PM PDT by Eastbound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head
"There are stains forward and aft in the orignal pics. Now, see post 146. That's a pic that is definitely not related to yesterday's action."

Good to know. Unexpected. Soot tends to be behind the direction of primary travel, but apparently there are exceptions.

Safe to say that no damage is being shown in any of those pictures, regardless.

171 posted on 07/15/2006 7:53:00 PM PDT by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

The thing to remember about the CIWS, is in the automated missile defense mode, it will fire as soon as a target enters it's envelope, and match certain criteria. No human intervention required. This mode, is probably not the smartest mode to be in, with fast gunships zooming around, as the scenario presents itself.

In Manual mode, somebody has to turn a key, and designate a target as hostile. Takes a few seconds longer, but not much longer, and well within that 60 second envelope that has been estimated that they had.

Plenty long enough to detonate the missile at close range, which will still do crippling damage to the ship, but nowhere near the amount, if it had actually struck and detonated.


172 posted on 07/15/2006 7:58:41 PM PDT by Klutz Dohanger (Folding - Help science, as you browse the web. Team#36120)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: Klutz Dohanger

60 seconds from launch to impact...probably a whole lot less from acquisition to impact, maybe 15-20. Maybe almost zero if reports bear out that the systems were not active.


173 posted on 07/15/2006 8:00:41 PM PDT by Jeff Head (God, family, country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: justa-hairyape
"The back end of the superstructure looks odd."

I thought so too. Doesn't look to tidy there, does it. Here's a cut with a little enhancement. Still can't make sense of what it's supposed to be. You could be right!!


174 posted on 07/15/2006 8:06:52 PM PDT by Eastbound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: Southack; Jeff Head
Good to know. Unexpected. Soot tends to be behind the direction of primary travel, but apparently there are exceptions.

I've never see soot come from a discharge port though. I think this is likely the ship. Interesting point too is the pneumatic fenders handing from the aft port side. The soot points to something happening below decks. I could have wiped out the heat exchanger for an emergency generator or even a main engine. Such a rupture in that case would most likely produce soot normally not seen. The account of the thud says likely dud or fragments from a near miss one of the two. Then again it may not be soot we are seeing but good old fashioned crud jarred loose from a near by explosion or the ship being jarred by a dud.

Keep in mind when I say heat exchanger I mean the salt water radiator for the engines. They use water cooled radiators which are referred to as heat exchangers. If this is the case the engines cooling systems may be capable of cross connecting and one exchanger serve both.

175 posted on 07/15/2006 8:06:57 PM PDT by cva66snipe (If it was wrong for Clinton why do some support it for Bush? Party over nation destroys the nation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

15-20 seconds would have been plenty, if the watchstanders are sharp, and on the ball, as I assume the IDF guys are.

Here is the doctrine aboard the FF I was stationed on, for a late reported missile. Once the threat bearing is known, via ECM or a lookout, the OOD immediately turns to put the threat, 20 degrees abaft the beam, or about 110 relative, if the missile is coming in on the starboard side. This creates the greatest separation between the ship, and the missile, without presenting a large radar cross-section. Next, SRBOC (chaff) and/or Flares are launched on the side away from the threat, in this case, the port, so as soon as the ship clears, there is a large bloom, astern of the ship, if it's a radar or IR missile.

At the same time, when a missile call is heard, the system is brought out of standby, and if nothing else, the CIWS is quick. About 2 1/2 seconds, and it can acquire a target, and be ready to fire.

Probably some brown stained pants on the bridge, because it all happens so quick, but only a near miss detonation, or near miss destruction, can explain how the ship survived, and yes, the Israeli's read our tactical doctrine, including missile defense. It goes a long way to explaining why the damage is on the stern, and apparently, on the far side of the flight deck. A large chunk of the missile, probably went ballistic after the explosion, causing the damage.


176 posted on 07/15/2006 8:14:22 PM PDT by Klutz Dohanger (Folding - Help science, as you browse the web. Team#36120)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: Klutz Dohanger
Thanks, that is as I thought as regards the doctrine and procedure.

I am sure the IDF's must be very similar.

I still want to find out if the reports about the systems not being active are true. I find that impossible to beleive or consider in such an environment. We shall see. As it is, I have come tobelieve at this point that these picks do not represent pics of after action damage.

177 posted on 07/15/2006 8:23:37 PM PDT by Jeff Head (God, family, country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head
I still want to find out if the reports about the systems not being active are true. I find that impossible to beleive or consider in such an environment. We shall see. As it is, I have come tobelieve at this point that these picks do not represent pics of after action damage.

I'm not too familiar with the follow-on variants of CIWS, as I retired in 1993, but the earlier models had 3 modes. Fully automated, Ready, and Manual. There may be some confusion in the J-Post's mind, about the difference between fully automated, and just plain "turned on". I know, we NEVER, NEVER, NEVER put ours into fully automated, unless we were fully at sea, and didn't have anything around us for a good 20 miles or so. R2D2 would track seagulls, and if it had had ammo in it, would have been blasting away. Our FC's were doing PMS one day, as our SH-2 Lamps was doing a close flyby, and they were testing FA mode. I was ASAC at the time, and got some very ripe and colorful radio traffic regarding that. Friggin' FC's turned out to be the bad guys, because they didn't notify CIC or the Bridge which checks they were doing, and JOOD didn't double check... but still... Technically, if R2D2 was in Ready mode, it was turned off. But the realities of the situation, are different than what most people think.
178 posted on 07/15/2006 8:46:53 PM PDT by Klutz Dohanger (Folding - Help science, as you browse the web. Team#36120)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: Spktyr
Oh I don't know, several brave "tin cans" took multiple 14 inch shells apiece off Samar and still made 15 knots, and smoke. One of them cut a cruiser in half with its torpedos and got dozens of superstructure hits on BBs and CAs, while taking 3 14 inch and about a dozen 6 and 8 inch hits.

This idea that any ship hit is "done for" does not withstand historical scrutiny.

179 posted on 07/15/2006 8:52:07 PM PDT by JasonC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: JasonC

The tin cans of that era are a far cry from their modern descendants. They had actual armor, where a modern DD generally doesn't.

Also, most of the weight of a shell is the shell, not the warhead/payload. The Silkworm actually carries more explosive than a 14" shell.


180 posted on 07/15/2006 9:13:31 PM PDT by Spktyr (Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 221-231 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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