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 ... 161-180181-200201-220221-231 next last
To: Jeff Head

Thanks for the heads-up. I remember having to worru about those while I was in the Gulf. Maybe we were giving them too much credit.


181 posted on 07/15/2006 9:37:57 PM PDT by tarawa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Spktyr
The Fletchers, Gearings, and Allen M. Sumner classes did not have armour - speed and manoeuverability were their armour.
182 posted on 07/15/2006 9:42:56 PM PDT by Army Air Corps (Four fried chickens and a coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head
These pics just do not show enough damage t me. I am beginning to wonder about them.

You and me both. The small hole forward of the helo deck is present on other pics of other ships of that class. That is not a missile hit. Somebody else did some research (don't know if it is on this thread or not), and the ship has a backup diesel propulsion system. In one pic, there is black soot around the after hole, in another there is black soot around both. Looks like exhaust ports to me.

If the missile flew in the helo hanger, I keep wondering "where's the damage?" They reported fires so severe that they almost lost the ship. The pics are showing no blistered or blackened paint, no warped bulkheads, no soot, no firefighting equipment, no fire watch on deck, nothing. I don't know, man. I am getting more and more skeptical as this goes along.

Add to that the fact that they said that they were providing the AAW for the task force, and they turned off their AAW capabilities? WTF?

The only smoke that I am seeing has mirrors involved.

183 posted on 07/15/2006 9:51:33 PM PDT by wyattearp (Study! Study! Study! Or BONK, BONK, on the head!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: wyattearp; Jeff Head

Thyanks to you and others for putting a voice to the suspicion that I had about the first photos that hit the media.


184 posted on 07/15/2006 10:00:59 PM PDT by Army Air Corps (Four fried chickens and a coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: Army Air Corps

Thyanks = Thanks


185 posted on 07/15/2006 10:01:21 PM PDT by Army Air Corps (Four fried chickens and a coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: csvset

That ship looks like it just came out of the shipyards. That can't be an after-action shot. That is a very small ship. If it took a 165kg warhead, or even a hit by a 600 knot dud, it would have at least scratched the paint!


186 posted on 07/15/2006 10:06:56 PM PDT by wyattearp (Study! Study! Study! Or BONK, BONK, on the head!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: wyattearp
The only smoke that I am seeing has mirrors involved.

Smoke and mirrors perhaps, but there are 4 dead Israeli sailors. At least a very dangerous game of cat and mouse. The cat however had longer and stronger nails then expected and it cut a good gash into the mouse. This happened just a day or two after Hezbollha claimed it had some 'surprises'.

187 posted on 07/15/2006 10:13:34 PM PDT by justa-hairyape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: justa-hairyape

I meant smoke and mirrors regarding what is being reported. I apologize for any misunderstanding.

I don't see how the pics can be after-action shots, unless the ship didn't get hit. Even if the warhead didn't explode, there would be significant damage from a 600 knot impact. I'm thinking kamikaze slamming into a Destroyer kind of damage, and this thing is half the size of a Fletcher Class Destroyer. There should be lots of bent, twisted, scorched metal. I suspect that in the next few days we'll see pics of the ship with the back half blown to pieces.

I also have a very hard time believing that they turned off their defensive systems. What has been reported indicates that they turned off even their passive detection gear. That's insane. At first I was extremely angry about it, but then I thought about it some more. There is no way that they did that. I don't care what the press is reporting: There is no way that they did that.

I can (almost) understand them taking their weapons down from their automatic settings, but turning off their detection gear? To what purpose? Passive gear does not radiate; it is undetectable. There is absolutely no reason to turn it off, but the press is saying that they did. No way.

Too much doesn't make sense about what we are being told. I'm sure it will all be a lot more clear in time, but what has been reported thus far is bunk, IMHO.


188 posted on 07/15/2006 10:43:18 PM PDT by wyattearp (Study! Study! Study! Or BONK, BONK, on the head!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

Great thread, Jeff and thanks for the ping.


189 posted on 07/15/2006 10:49:20 PM PDT by Minuteman23
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Spktyr
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.

It wasn't a Silkworm, but I still think that you're right. The missile was carring 363 lbs of explosive. I had to look it up:

(NAVAL ORDNANCE 1937 CHAPTER XIII PROJECTILES)

"Where the projectile must meet heavy face-hardened armor, the result is a massive piece of steel with a heavy head, thick walls and a small cavity, called an armor piercing projectile. In such projectiles the weight of the bursting charge (high explosive) varies between 2.1 per cent to 2.6 per cent of the total weight of the projectile. If the size of the charge is increased the Projectile is unequal to matching even caliber plate at battle ranges and angles of fall, while if the size of the charge is reduced the fragmentation of the projectile on burst is not efficient. (Plate I, Fig. 3.)

Where the projectile may encounter armor of a thickness of only to 1/2 caliber, or a combination of light side plating, bulkheads, and decks, the cavity can be somewhat enlarged, and the design is called a common projectile. In such projectiles the charge represents, for major and intermediate calibers, about 6.0 per cent of the total weight, and for sizes below 6 inches the percentage falls to about 3.0 per cent to 3.5 per cent. (Plate I, Fig. 4.)"

190 posted on 07/15/2006 11:12:03 PM PDT by wyattearp (Study! Study! Study! Or BONK, BONK, on the head!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head
Just read this at:

(International Middle East Media Center)

"Close to midnight the ship made its way to port in Israel where its rudders were repaired."

If this is correct, it likely means that the ship was hit square in the butt. It also means that the pics can't be current.

191 posted on 07/15/2006 11:34:37 PM PDT by wyattearp (Study! Study! Study! Or BONK, BONK, on the head!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

Either the 160kg warhead failed to explode or the Sa'ar V was not hit by a Slikworm.


192 posted on 07/16/2006 12:13:31 AM PDT by rmlew (I'm a Goldwater Republican... Don Goldwater 2006!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wyattearp
"Close to midnight the ship made its way to port in Israel where its rudders were repaired." If this is correct, it likely means that the ship was hit square in the butt. It also means that the pics can't be current.

That still leaves questions. A repair inside as in hydraulic steering system {guessing} below helo pad area or an actual rudder hit and almost miss from a low missile?

4 dead squids would account for a hit into the ship from above or a close to ship explosion without full contact. Interesting we still could have a picture of it on post 146. Divers over the side??? Pneumatic fenders and a Jacobs Ladder of sorts I can't tell about the ladder for sure though. And a quick rudder repair to get it home if it was the rudder itself. What I'm saying is the rudder isn't an easy target even if it went in the water before striking it. But it's possible and could account for the thud. The soot? Possibly oil & grease from pumping out a space that was hit.

If fire rumors were true I'd say possibly an above surface explosion with remains of the missle going into the effected area. Not a true direct hit and would leave parts lying around to ID it. It would be interesting to know if it was the rudder underneath or steering system inside actually hit. Either one would be possible under certain conditions and not show much surface damage.

193 posted on 07/16/2006 12:23:49 AM 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 191 | View Replies]

To: Klutz Dohanger; Jeff Head
Everyone is focusing on the Phalanx CIWS, but what about the Barak?
It was designed for this purpose.
194 posted on 07/16/2006 12:34:55 AM PDT by rmlew (I'm a Goldwater Republican... Don Goldwater 2006!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

Thank you so much for the ping. I appreciate the pics, links, and info.


195 posted on 07/16/2006 2:20:26 AM PDT by .30Carbine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: wyattearp
That can't be an after-action shot.

It's not , nor was it posted as such.

Click on the source link.

196 posted on 07/16/2006 5:17:38 AM PDT by csvset ("It was like the hand of G_d slapping down and smashing everything." ~ JDAM strikes Taliban)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head
Reports said it was towed back to Haifa and was still smoldering when it got there.

Indeed, when the fog clears we'll know more.

197 posted on 07/16/2006 5:23:50 AM PDT by SampleMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

I'm off on vacation today, so I might not check in for a while. This ASCM scenario is very interesting in many different ways, and I can't wait to see the intel. I hope a lot of it is in the open, so we can discusss it.


198 posted on 07/16/2006 5:34:54 AM PDT by SampleMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: rmlew

I believe now that the systems may well have been off as has been reported. But before we can know that, we will have to see true pictures of the battle damage. These pics just do not show any damage at all IMHO.


199 posted on 07/16/2006 6:30:54 AM PDT by Jeff Head (God, family, country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: .30Carbine

You are welcome.


200 posted on 07/16/2006 6:31:34 AM PDT by Jeff Head (God, family, country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220221-231 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