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

To: The Great RJ
I know nothing about the Navy but it is my guess that the lifeboat is more maneuverable than a destroyer and that the destroyer can not shift positions quickly enough to stay between the lifeboat and the shore.

What I have wondered is why a sub could not position itself under the lifeboat and surface, lifting the lifeboat out of the water.

I also wonder why a destroyer did not steam close to them at full spead and flip them with its wake. At that point, the pirates could do nothing.

I am sure that they would have no weapon that would penetrate the hull of a nuclear sub.

Even if the lifeboat flipped, the seals could then take over as it is not possible for a pirate to fire at them once they are dumped in the water.

80 posted on 04/11/2009 5:43:07 PM PDT by old curmudgeon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies ]


To: old curmudgeon
Even if the lifeboat flipped, the seals could then take over as it is not possible for a pirate to fire at them once they are dumped in the water.

The lifeboat is fully enclosed and is meant to withstand being flipped. It's not an open boat.

83 posted on 04/11/2009 5:45:57 PM PDT by Riley (The Fourth Estate is the Fifth Column.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies ]

To: old curmudgeon
"I also wonder why a destroyer did not steam close to them at full spead and flip them with its wake.

The lifeboat is just designed too well. If you're familiar with a fisherman's bobber, the lifeboat behalves the exact same way. You could swamp it with a wake, or a tidal wave for that matter and it would continue to float and would very quickly right itself. That's exactly what is was designed to do - maintain seaworthiness in the most extreme of circumstances and conditions.

103 posted on 04/11/2009 6:10:13 PM PDT by Big_Monkey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies ]

To: old curmudgeon

I think there is a sub under them aw’rite :

http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0geu598POFJq_EAsh5XNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTEzYmczcGY2BHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDOARjb2xvA2FjMgR2dGlkA0RGUjVfMTAz/SIG=11v26lt83/EXP=1239584252/**http%3a//www.specialoperations.com/Navy/SSGN/

(snips)

The change in mission involved many changes to the submarine and requires years of work in the shipyard. The Tomahawk missiles that will replace the Trident are much shorter and require less room, allowing for not only more weapons to be carried but also for enough room to carry four platoons of up to 66 SEALs for extended periods of time or up to 100 SEALs for shorter periods. Two of the missile tubes will be replaced not with Tomahawk VLSs but with diver lock-in/out chambers and mounts for the SEAL DDS (Dry Dock Shelter) and newer ASDS vehicle.

The first two SSGN’s are scheduled to re-enter service in late 2007.
~~~
Should be interesting...


109 posted on 04/11/2009 6:13:58 PM PDT by 1COUNTER-MORTER-68 (THROWING ANOTHER BULLET-RIDDLED TV IN THE PILE OUT BACK~~~~~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | 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