Skip to comments.Navy was unaware of missile threat
Posted on 07/15/2006 1:58:15 PM PDT by Woodstock
Initial probe into attack on missile boat Friday reveals Navy had no intelligence of possible missile threat in area where boat was operating; missile, aircraft interception system has been turned off due to presence of IDF planes in sector
The actions taken by crewmembers of the IDF missile boat that sustained a direct Hizbullah missile hit Friday, prevented a great disaster that could have resulted in numerous casualties, an initial inquiry into the incident reveals.
Sailor killed at sea / Tova Dadon
Shortly after deadly attack on Navy ship operating off Beirut shores, Amgar family of Ashdod informed their son is okay; next phone call bears different news: Soldier, who was so fond of sea, is missing. His body recovered Saturday
Brigadier-General Noam Page of the Navy said in a press conference Saturday that the Navy was unaware that a missile threat existed in the sector, and that the boat's crew had acted accordingly.
Missile boats are equipped with a missile interception system capable of automatically intercepting any missile or aircraft approaching it. However, as the boat was operating in an area where a large number of IDF planes were present, the Navy had refrained from activating the system.
Navy sources said that had they known the Hizbullah was in possession of missiles of the type used against the boat Saturday, the missile interception system would have been turned on.
Weve been hit
The initial investigation revealed that at 8:45 p.m. crewmembers on board the vessel were preparing for Shabbat dinner when a loud blat was heard. One of the ships commanders has informed the Navys control command: Weve been hit. In the first few minutes after the strike, it was unclear what hit the boat, and the sailors concentrated on extinguishing the fire that broke out at the landing pad after 50 kilograms of explosives penetrated the vessels body.
Large Navy and Air Force units were dispatched to the place and began assisting the forces on board the boat.
Simultaneously, the crew conducted a damage control routine aimed at establishing what systems sustained damages in the attack. At the first stage it was decided to pull the boat away from its position using another boat, and at the same time to surround it with additional crafts in order to protect it from being hit again.
A senior Navy official said Saturday that the fire on board has repeatedly erupted after being extinguished as a result of the heat absorbed by metal objects on the boat. Only after the crew managed to contain the fire and tend to the damages it was discovered that four sailors were missing.
It won't happen again. IDF will be prepared next time.
Hezbulloh had one shot with this.
check this out
The Iranians are Israel's principle enemey. Hezbollah is the Iranian surrogate. The Iranians have had the C-802 for a long time. I do not buy this...and of they did not prepare for potential missile engagement while in combat off the Lebannon coast against Hezbollah, it was a critical and fatal mistake.
..it was a critical and fatal mistake.
For one captain and 4 sailors it sure was!
Inexcusable IMHO...tends to confirm that their missile detection and wanring systems were not on. I hope this is not the case...but this is simply amaziong and inexcusable if true. Will wait for more official word.
oops forgot to turn the radar on.... my bad.
wtf? a ship designed for precisely this type of action not readied for this type of action?
Sometimes the digital message traffic to/from the CMS gets in the way.
That's the kind of stuff that happens when somebody at the top has their head up their a$$.
THis story is bad OPSEC. If it is true Israel was unready, best thing to do is not tell, let the Iranians/Hezbullah think they're golden, sail the boats in so the bad guys fire the missles up, locate the firing points, take the missles down and let the IAF get the launch points. Maybe even some commandows to find the Iranian bodies afterwards. That would be smart.
Seemed that way to me. Hope there's some reason for it.
Jeff, one othrt interesting point..the next generation of US Navy DDE's and missile frigates have greatly reduced crews. Supposedly the damage control systems are "automated"..I suspect that when they do a detailed analysis of the heroic job done by the Israeli crew, a few senior US admirals are in for a rude awakening. If the Israeli ship had been manned at the proposed US levels, I suspect it would be at the bottom now..
Israel's Navy leaves something to be desired.
If they are going to use that lameass excuse, they better worry if theres a submarine in the area!
A bigger oops would have been if the system was activated and started shooting down IDF planes. Another Freeper noted that the ship may have been operating to close to shore to be effective for its designated role.
I read it was not a UAV but a c-802 antiship cruisemissile
oops forgot to turn the radar on.... my bad.
Or disinfo to cover up a failed system?
Yes, blue-on-blue engagements are bad, but c'mon. This is what IFF is for. USS Stark's CWIS was down for preventive maintenance. Why have the systems if you're not going to use them when in-theater? Lesson NOT learned.
I suspect that you are spot on correct with that statement, sir.
It was a calculated risk and they got burned. Fool me once...
It requires a change in tactics and the IDF will adapt. Of the 3 branches, the Navy is probably the weakest - only because the army and air force have had a helluva lot more practice, given that the arab navies consist of squat.
This is significant only in the escalation of weapons and obvious involvement by other powers and the brief emotional lift to the Mohammedans. The true battle impact is limited.
iirc weren't the initial patriot failures due to not resetting radar after previous tracking engagements?
where's the damn reset button?
(not that its the same)
Remember the USS Starke?
Remember the war games circa 2002/2003 where a Marine General "sank" the aircraft carrier USS John F. Kennedy? Remember sometime summer of 2004/2005 where the USS John F. Kennedy collided with a Dhow in the Persian Gulf?
"Or disinfo to cover up a failed system?"
Perhaps. Human error may explain it.
Failure of the system to detect and intercept the drone is scarier for future encounters.
Israel needs to get destroyers, cruisers, etc. The Muslims are not going to have a weak navy forever.
the stark was a guided missile frigate whose phalanx system was not operating properly. iirc
As many have stated the Israeli Navy is really the ugly stepchild. They really haven't been involved in any major engagements since some 1973 battles with the Syrians near Latakia.
I susoect this was due to carelessness and some initiative on the part of Hezbollah.
It's happened to us as well. The Iraqis and the Taliban have shot down a bunch of Apaches and Blackhawks. A good number of Abrams Tanks and Bradleys have been taken out by the insurgents due to IEDS and other munitions. In Gulf War 1 a few jets were shot down. The NVA and VC shot down quite a bit more than a few. To expect to fight a war and have no materiel losses or dmages is really unrealistic. Hezbollah night het a few IAF planes as well. I certainly wouldn't be shocked.
That's what war is largely. The bad guy adapts and you react. The ship seemed to make it back to port of its own steam. The damage appears to be less than the Cole for example. I suspect they'll learn from this and move on.
Bingo. The vulnerability of ships is so underrated especially by the US. Any contest between high tech navies and air forces will be a blood bath.
The other excuse I have seen...was that they did not want to shoot down friendlies.
Like they can not id the bad guy !
Did Iran buy some subs lately ?
yes they did, russian kilos wasn't it?
I admit, I am thinking ahead of the curve but it is better to be safe than sorry.
Where are the Arabs getting the ships from and where will they be based on the Med? Not going to be Egypt, Lebanon or Palestine (sic) so that rules out most of the coast. Can't bring anything thru the canal either.
I personally prefer Navy to all branches but apart from a missile platform, 5 inch support for ground and special ops insertion, can't see what they'd need big ships for.
Wouldn't mind giving the IDF BB-62 and letting it sit off the coast again though.
The French will sell Exocets to anyone with a 4th of July permit or approver equal and they have been around since the 60's.
Like they can not id the bad guy !
The problem is they can't always ID the good guys:
No system is perfect. Nobody wants to kill allied pilots and blow multi-million dollar planes out of the sky. And nobody wants to see one of their multi-million dollar warships disabled or sunk.
It looks like this was a judgement call -- with plenty of monday morning quarterbacking.
I've been digging around for a few hours, and I can't find anything other than what was reported before about their "detection and deflection" gear being deliberately turned off. I still don't know if that meant EW gear, or some part of the weapons system.
What I am trying to find out is if they are talking about passive (EW) detection gear, or active (radar) detection gear. Since they used the phrase "detection and deflection" instead of "detection and destruction", that seems to indicate that they are talking about a combination of passive receivers and active jammers, rather than active radars and missile systems.
If it was the EW gear that was turned off, somebody needs to hang for it.
You said earlier that this boat was only 10 miles off the shore - too little time to react, right?
These types of ships are built to operate in open water, not for close in-shore ops, right?
Sounds to me like this ship was not the best choice to perform the task at hand, especially if they knew the anti-missle systems would interfere with friendly air assets and could not be turned on.
My experience with defensive on-board Naval systems?
But I did sleep somewhere last night.
I do, though, have first hand experience working on the late, great F-4/G. I'm sure you know what platform was designed to do.
Even during a routine training flight, that crew had to be mindful of what system they turned on when.
I don't believe, for one second, that this ship would have been where it was, if they had even a whiff of an anti-ship missle threat. Or they could have coordinated / cleared out the air assets so they could operate.....or they....etc.
Still, like you said, it does not make sense.
Sadly, warfare is repleat with many examples of situations like this.
This could have been a lot worse.
I just pinded you to a thread where I have pics posted. Tell me what you think.
I was in a Navy exercise with multiple opposing task forces, and when the "smoke" cleared, 30% of the planes that were "shot down" were friendlies. (There were some really pissed-off pilots, BTW). Granted, that was over 20 years ago, and we are better than that now. The Israelis may not be.
Still, I'm still waiting to find out what exactly it was that they turned off. I can (almost) understand them turning off their automated response systems, but I do NOT understand them turning off their detection systems. An earlier article said that was what they did. It doesn't make any sense.
Kind of expensive assets to use as bait for some cheap C-802s. No?
They were in port when they were hit.
Technology is not the "end all".
Sometimes, eyeballs and eyeball enhancement devices are the obvious choice of protection.
I think their "rubber raft" detection system failed.
I think Hezbullah will fire their missiles anyway if they have the chance.
Note to self - Destroy radiating emitters ..
I think that I remember that the Iranian were trying to buy a sub from Russia, but never read what finally happened.
But my memory is going, so who knows what actually happened ?