Posted on 08/13/2008 10:05:16 PM PDT by tcrlaf
One of the members of the crew of a ship in the Black Sea Fleet, upon his return to Sevastopol is interviewed by a reporter regarding the battle with Georgian cutters off of Abkhazia on 10 August.
This is currently leading the news in the Ukraine. The story suggests he is being interviewed by a kpunews reporter.
"We took up station guarding the opposed landing on the Abkhaz shore when all of a sudden four high speed targets were detected. We sent out an IFF signal and the targets didn't react. Receiving a command from the flagship, we got into formation and right at that moment the unidentified targets opened fire on the ship formation and flagship. The cruiser was damaged and a small fire broke out aboard. Then, fearing for seaworthyness, the flagship withdrew from the firing area." - the sailor said.
"Right then the small missile boats clearly fired," the participant continued. "Taking up position, our MRK launched a "Malakhit" (SS-N-9) anti-surface missile, which literally cut the lead ship, the "Tbilisi" to ribbons.
After that, fire was shifted to the rest of the Georgian ships. Another ship was damaged, we couldn't finish it off, allowing it to leave the scene under its own power.
So the Moskva was apparently damaged in the attack and disengaged. She is certainly capable of destroying big ships, but the battle appears to highlight a weakness against small ships. The battle also tends to add credibility to what many have said, it is best to fight small ships at sea with small ships at sea.
The sailor goes on to say it took a minute and a half for the Georgian ship to sink in 300 meters of water.
(Excerpt) Read more at translate.google.com ...
It looks like the Moskva is designed to fire in one direction only, as if it is a purpose-built weapon designed to attack our Carrier Battle Groups. Such a ship would be vulnerable to this type of attack.
I'm not adding Navair to the keywords because this isn't strictly speaking a Navair thread, but I am pinging it because most of you will probably find it as interesting as I did.
Click on pic for past Navair pings.
Post or FReepmail me if you wish to be enlisted in or discharged from the Navair Pinglist.
The only requirement for inclusion in the Navair Pinglist is an interest in Naval Aviation.
This is a medium to low volume pinglist.
Moskva Damaged PING!
umm, intercepting an RPG round really isn’t in the cards for any system except reactive armor.
Phalanx is most definitely not designed to intercept incoming gun rounds of any type.
It’s in the description - Phalanx was originally designed to shoot down or deflect incoming missiles and naval gunfire projectiles up to about 5 inch.
And with the littoral warfare modifications (the Block 1B), it *can* take out an RPG round... provided it’s far enough away (I think it’s 50 meters or so).
John F. Kennedy first got famous for letting his PT 109 get sliced in half by a Japanese destroyer.
Right you are. Saw the Black Sea Fleet in Sevastopol last year. The Moskva looked all right, but the rest of the fleet was pretty much laid up except for some gun boats,
Our lowest bidderis 5 times more capable than Russia's highest.
“Phalanx and Aegis. Didn’t help the USS Stark or USS Cole, did they?”
Vulnerability of Stark and Cole were due to readiness, not weapons capability.
Southack gave you links to only a fraction of USN defenses. Add AECM and Ram to the list. Air assets are huge.
Ask the Libyan Russian built patrol boats from how close they were able to get to us before our A-6’s waxed them. We tracked them from the time they untied from the dock. Once they lit off the first targeting radar, air assets smoked them.
Off subject...The picture of Moskva earlier (Slava Class), I toured one in Norfolk (’90), she has zero compartmentability and nearly zero firefighting equipment. Slava’s were designed to first strike our carrier groups then run like hell. It does not surprise me she took a hit then left in a hurry.
Actually, Stark’s Phalanax was malfunctioning. The captain and crew knew it before they headed up into the Gulf, but did not have time to get it fixed before the Execet hit.
In the US Submarine force, we call that the Roman Candle. It does not take a big hit to cause it to go into flames.
“....At present the EU imports 51% of its oil from the Middle East and North Africa, with a further 23% coming from Russia, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA).
Thus, the Commission views the new pipeline of ‘great strategic importance’, as the EU seeks to lessen its dependency on these countries....”
....and that my FRiend is the REAL reason for Putin’s Adventure in Georgia.
Well, the Soviet Air Force always was synonimous for incompetence, despite its excellent aircraft.
You're quite right.
She's a Slava Class designed later in the Cold War. No compartmentability, very little firefighting equipment. The one that visited Norfolk had paint so thick on their missile tubes I doubt they could open. Material condition sucked.
The Soviet strategy was to build lots of cheap ships, loaded them with missiles, and strike first our carriers first.
Duncan who? I thought you were going to mention John Kerry. He was in Vietnam, you know... he even got wounded and stuff, Forrest Gump style. /typical libtard
You got that right.Politics is the only reason kennedy was not courts marshalled.
“The Cole’s and Stark’s Phalanx systems were turned OFF.”
“Thats immaterial. The simple fact is - they didnt work. How and why doesnt matter.”
Go out and get into your car this morning. No no no, don’t start it. Now sit there for a couple of hours and bitch to it for not taking your ass to work.
If the iranians initiate hostilities with their boats the first attack will likely be successful if they only send out three or four attackers. Our people will hold fire until the Iranians fire all at once. Depending on what they shoot we could lose a couple of ships. The attack will be a one shot deal because the attackers will very quickly turn to small hot fragments and the bases they come from will fare the same. We have allowed these boats to get entirely too close before running them off on a couple of occasions already.
Hmm, OK.
I learn something every day.
So long as they are not carrying thermobarics, I am not worried. Been in and out of those waters many times. Know the threat better than most...
22 years USN.
Okay, help this poor old grunt out with this navy stuff.
My experience with boats is limited to those I catch fish from.
What’s an MK48 and what is its purpose?
Same questions for “688.”
How thick is the armor plating on a ship like the Moskva (Is armor plating on a ship called “armor plating?”). And what kind of ordnance on a small boat would be used to successfully sink a ship like the Moskva?
The Houdongs are IRGCN.
The Kamans are IRN.
And I agree on the Kilos and the Coastal Defense Missiles.
From the coast roads they can range 95% of the PG...
Iranians can be quite suicidal. Marching teenagers thru minefields to clear them was an IRGC tactic in the Iran-Iraq war...
Only 38 Boghammers in the IRGCN.
Most of the rest are even smaller.
The exagerations of the Iranian force realy irritate me. They are not that good even when attacking unarmed merchies...
Georgia is a very small place compared with Iraq.The Russian Army could just flood the place with manpower like it finally did in Chechnya. The Russians don’t worry so much about casualties as we do.
Mk48 is a torpedo
688 (as in SSN 688) is a Los Angeles Class Submarine.
Add to that the Rolling-Airframe-Missile (RAM), and Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile (ESSM).
Results of a MK-48 TORPEX 
Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)
LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)
If John Kerry were as dumb as Forrest Gump he might have come back and made something useful of himself.
How do you defend one of these small boats against an air attack by Russian fighter jets? They would seem to be sitting ducks.
Both ships were damaged and returned to service.
Not saying that either of them should not have been better prepared, but you canot judge AEGIS by either of those engagments. Neither of those vessels were operating in a war time, full combat readiness state.
For a much nbetter example of what is the likely outcome of a US Navy, Iranian engegement when both forces are operating in such a mode, research Operation Praying Mantis.
We have improved our capabilities significantly since then.
Yes but why is it turned off? Why, in a potentially hazardous environment, is it not in ready mode? Is is because it was being maintained because it is broke? That is not a reliable weapon. Is it because they are scared that it will blast anything, friendly, hostile or merely curious, that comes within three miles? That is not a reliable weapon.
The function of the military is the controlled application of force. People tend to concentrate on the force bit of that, but control is equally important. The most powerful weapon in the world is no good if you cannot use it.
To follow your analogy, I’m not blaming my computer for not working after its unplugged. I’m blaming my computer because all its impressive gee-whiz features take up so much time, memory and resources I can’t get the work I actually want to do done.
I wish we had some SSNs handy, to shadow the Georgian naval activities and ensure the success of any of their attacks... Wouldn't that be something... They open up on a cruiser with their 50 cals, and the next thing you know it is blown out of the water!
It does look like that, but it doesnt really. The ASM’s are all pointed forward true, but as they are all self-guiding they just turn around mid flight to the required direction. About the only thing they lose by firing astern is some range.
The anti-air suite covers all angles of attack.
That’s not the point I’m trying to make.
To follow your analogy, I go out and sit in my car and it doesn’t take me to work. Does it matter whether its broke, a bad car, or I’m very lazy/stupid? Yes of course it does, but the end result in all three cases is the same - I still haven’t gotten to work.
In the same way, if you have a weapon that is switched off, is it still a weapon? Why is it switched off in a potentially dangerous environment? I dont know, but I do know that reliability and useability of a weapon is an important part of how effective it is.
It is hard to get a submarine into the Black Sea. It is not impossible but it would take some great underwater sailing.
JFK had been drinking too much Capt Morgan or Scotch for his tour of duty on the PT-109. JFK a drunk Zero on duty at the time and falsely made a Hero via the kennedy name.
Time Marches On,
NSNR
Your post #101, reminds me of the Falklands War, when the Argentines were able to come in low with success with A-4 Skyhawks, against the British naval forces, which had been built to fight a different war...
IIRC, the Soviets did not do very well in Afghanistan in fighting the muhadjaheen in the 1980s and were forced to retreat. Our efforts in this decade in the same country, while not yet decisive, have been more successful than those of the Red Army. Remember that it took a decade for the Soviets to fully suppress post-World War II guerrilla movements in Ukraine and the Baltic states, efforts that were unsupported by the West.
As for naval power, neither Tsarist Russia nor the USSR ever developed superior fleets. The Japanese Navy decisively defeated the Russians at sea in 1904-05. Since neither Germany nor Russia were primarily sea powers, the Eastern Fronts of the two World Wars were mostly fought on the ground and the air. The Soviet navy of the 1970s probably came the closest to being a challenge to American sea power, but mostly in the area of submarines and not with surface warships. Even at the height of Soviet power, they never attempted what the Germans tried unsuccessfully to do before World War I and challenge the planet's primary naval power, then Britain and later the U.S. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the old Soviet fleet deteriorated. Putin may have the petrodollars to restore it somewhat, but Russia is still far away from even the days of Brezhnev in terms of naval (or military) power.
Never say never, though. When America leaves the world stage as a superpower, some nation will fill the void, as has happened since the dawn of civilization. It may not be Russia, but it will be some nation.
I think this has been answered already, but the Shiites are more suicidal than the Sunnis. It all goes back to their sense of shame for not managing to protect Mohammed's nephew or some nonsense like that. They even have a self-flagellating Holy day to build upon their sense of worthlessness and guilt - FReepers have posted pictures of this. Children as young as six get to slash themselves with knives, but it's fun for all the family.
The Besijii were the (Shiite) Iranian teenage suicide troops trained by (amongst others) a younger Ahmadinejad and sacrificed to practically no effect in the Iran-Iraq war. Astonishingly, about 33% of the current population of Iran are ex-Besijii.
Sincerely hope this is helpful.
“This is something that we need to know more about, i.e. what did the Georgians use and how many missiles were fired.”
So, we let them duke it out and do the R & D for us
Also heard another story about a Skysweeper demo. The gun almost engaged the metal bleachers when its radar fire director locked on them instead of the drone. The stories may be apocryphal, but automated weapons systems are potentially dangerous!
OK some folk do go over the top, but lets not underestimate the opposition either. Terrorists are evil and wrong, but they’re not insane and they are certainly not stupid.
That explains the Vladdie Boy trolls the last couple days who've been going around correcting people from dissing Russian equipment.
Now I have to say it's equally dangerous to underestimate the enemy as it is to overestimate it, but to hear these guys tell it everything the Russians have is brand new without a speck of rust on anything and it's all up to date if not better, blah, blah... And it turns out they're just trying to keep sales up.
I also agree with your later post that this is a side issue compared to OIL and OIL PIPELINES. Thanks for all the information you've shared.
“Not saying that either of them should not have been better prepared, but you canot judge AEGIS by either of those engagments. Neither of those vessels were operating in a war time, full combat readiness state.
For a much nbetter example of what is the likely outcome of a US Navy, Iranian engegement when both forces are operating in such a mode, research Operation Praying Mantis.”
This is all very true. The problem is that the Iranians know all that as much as we do. Therefore, if they have any brains at all (and they are not stupid) they won’t obligingly take the US navy on in a stand-up, full force ‘everybody-ready-and-at-full-fighting-efficiency’ fight. Unsportingly, they are likely to resort to unconventional operations - suicide boats, sneak attacks, chemical warfare..whatever. A lot of research into this kind of thing is being done by America’s potential enemies (particularly the Chinese incidentally - look up “assassin’s mace”).
“Phalanx and Aegis. Didn’t help the USS Stark or USS Cole, did they?”
False comparison. The USS Cole had no orders to open fire in Yemen. The USS Stark did not have weapons ready. So both ships could of had all the weapons in the world, but with out the orders to use them; they were useless.
Your post #95 pretty well earns the Free Republic “Most Idiotic Statement of The Day” award.
Congrats.
Hey, do you play poker? We’ve got an opening for ya...
I was agreeing with everything you said until you hit on this point.
Nuclear weapons are the most powerful weapon, they are very useful and they don’t get used.
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.