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

To: R. Scott

Yeah what Im saying is that there are “patrol craft” around that are fairly significant surface combatants of today. I mean, there were destroyers in WWII that were no bigger (and quite a few even smaller).

These things are very hard to accurately describe because there is probably less of a consensus internationally as to what constitutes a “frigate”, “destroyer”, “corvette” or whatever now than there probably ever has been before. I personally would describe a patrol craft as a moderately fast sea-going gun armed (only) warship, probably with some kind of helicopter carrying (or at least refueling) capacity.


114 posted on 11/20/2007 3:35:11 AM PST by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies ]


To: Vanders9
I personally would describe a patrol craft as a moderately fast sea-going gun armed (only) warship, probably with some kind of helicopter carrying (or at least refueling) capacity.

Being an old timer I'd define a patrol craft as a vessel designed to patrol a river or harbor with a limited coastal mission. The above definition would have applied to nearly every ship but carriers in the old Navy.
The first destroyers I encountered were off the coast of Viet Nam forty years ago. I look at today's destroyers and they seem more like the old cruisers than destroyers in size Guns seem to be relegated to the role of maintaining tradition. I haven’t run into a Navy GMG in years.
My war was a long time ago - and we depended on Naval gunfire for a lot of our support. A destroyer could stand near our operation and deliver a massive number of five inch shells in a matter of minutes. A gun cruiser was reason for celebration. Trouble from a tree line? Call on the Navy and the trees would disappear. Tunnels and holes on a hill? Call on the Navy and the problem would ease if not disappear. We even preferred the old prop A-1 Sky Raider to the jets. It could hang around for hours. Jets came in, dropped a load and had to leave to refuel.
Am I starting to cry in my morning coffee? Maybe. Before I retired the Army went to high tech for the sake of high tech - following the lead of the Navy. I noticed the trend in the very early 80s. Some of what we bought for the sake of high tech was junk - the LACV 30 was a good example.

127 posted on 11/21/2007 2:23:26 AM PST by R. Scott (Humanity i love you because when you're hard up you pawn your Intelligence to buy a drink)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | 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