Looks like "A whiff of grape", might be in order.
Posted on 05/20/2020 6:14:35 PM PDT by Oatka
By Phil Stewart and Idrees Ali WASHINGTON, May 19 (Reuters) – In an alert that appeared aimed squarely at Iran, the U.S. Navy issued a warning on Tuesday to mariners in the Gulf to stay 100 meters (yards) away from U.S. warships or risk being “interpreted as a threat and subject to lawful defensive measures.”
(Excerpt) Read more at gcaptain.com ...
Looks like "A whiff of grape", might be in order.
100 meters is not far enough
Destroyer versus Cruiser.....same as Ford F150 versus 10 wheeler.
Nothing “veiled” about that warning. It very clearly reads as: “If you come anywhere near us, we’ll blow you out of the water and into kingdom come.”
Modern grape is much more potent .
The Navy’s CIWS fires 20mm depleted uranium armor-piercing shells at 4500 rounds per minute. It can be either an autonomous system (recommended for anti-missile defense) or a semi-manual system whereby it recommends firing upon targets but requires manual input to trigger the attack.
I think 5000 meters would be more appropriate. What do I know?
Wish I could find the limp “sternly worded letter” by obama and the article from immediately after where iranian vessels approached ours with impunity.
Fly a very large version of The 1ST Navy Jack under it a small flag that says if you can read the above flag your toast. Then turn the lion loose.
Actually, we switched to tungsten over a decade ago. We used DU for PAC-Fires (pre-action calibration) for a while, but I think it's all gone by now. Also, we added a camera with NV and IR, along with an "anti-surface mode", so it can be used against surface targets and low slow fliers when needed.
You know the correct answer. Warn off at 10K, sink at 5K.
Do we have any rail guns operational.
Test
Amazing technology. When a was in the Navy in the Vietnam era, we were barely above cannon balls...
Thanks for the update. I retired in 2007.
‘Also, we added a camera with NV and IR, along with an “anti-surface mode”, so it can be used against surface targets and low slow fliers when needed”.
These upgrades I am aware of as I have read about them in various trade magazines. But, I have never read of the change to tungsten. So, thanks again for the info.
Resembles the game of ‘chicken’.
I recall switching to tungsten in the late 1990’s over concern about low level radiation from DU ammo lockers.
A few questions for ya ET. I read that an attacking aircraft’s path is ‘plotted’ by the system’s targeting radar/computer and the weapon fills the sky where the aircraft will be with it’s projectiles. If Iran sent a swarm (50-100 say) of small, explosives laden ‘water borne kamakzie jobs at one of big ships, how would the system be aimed, by a human gunner or computer? Would the aiming system (if by computer) become overloaded or ‘confused’ trying figure out what attacker to blast first? With 50-100 attacking at the same time I can see a problem, or is there one? How long can the weapon fire before an overheating event happens? With that many attackers the weapon would sure get a workout! Thanks ET.
It would seem to me that using a EM rail gun on a close up target would be like using a mortar on the enemy in hand to hand combat.
We will sink an Iranian boat before the election. We are sending a message which we know will provoke the Iranians into doing something stupid. This will tie back to that deal Obama made with the Iranians.
Perfect way to solidify the party around Trump before the election.
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.