Pigeons Sitting on Stacked Containers Blasted by Tomahawk Missile

gCaptain ^ | February 9, 2015 | Rob Almeida

[Robert A Cook PE]

So if we were to accept your narrowly drawn position as accurate, perhaps the lesson learned is that all destroyers and cruisers should be replaced with frigates and converted freighters.

Yes.

A “stupid” 100,000 ton merchant vessel would be more survivable. Remember those billion dollar “warships” meekly trailing behind their “convoy” of tankers that were going through the minefields first?

[Axenolith]

In the Teds Holdover video’s he’s got some slo-mo shots of birds as they’re about to be hit with a pellet, and some notice it right before impact, and I think there might actually be one where it rears it’s head back and gets missed.

The pellets are going about 900 fps when he’s using a .177, I think he’s using a .25 cal of late but the velocity is close if not the same.

[MasterGunner01]

The Tomahawk missile used in the test did not have a warhead. The missile body acted as a Mach 0.8 cookie cutter to zoom through both sides of the container. You can see the plume after the missile comes out the side of the container. That is the airframe partial breakup and fuel tank rupture prior to ignition of the propellant. The rest of the airframe continues on to impact and skip on the ocean. The container carrier is running under remote control.

[21twelve]

“...an inert test missile.”

Marvin the Martian was watching. “Where’s the Kaboom? There was supposed to be a big Kaboom!”

That one pigeon looked like it might have been having trouble getting lift due to the hot air below him. I think I saw some questions marks above his head to trying to figure out why his flapping wasn’t working so well.

[sinsofsolarempirefan]

Its in the nature of modern naval weapons to be more destructive than a ship can be designed to handle. If armouring them up like old dreadnoughts did any good, they would still do it, but its pointless, because weapons designers can still design weapons that can punch through armour like butter.

Thats why its really important to stop the weapon before it hits the ship, and preferably, take out the enemy before they even get in range to attack.

[Rodamala]

[ImJustAnotherOkie]

I heard Brian Williams saw the pidgeons and used his Xray vision to disable the warhead in flight from the F18 chase plane he was piloting.

[Oztrich Boy]

Vietnam 17 June 1968, HMAS Hobart (Adams class DDG) hit by three Sparrow missiles fired by aircraft of her putative ally.

Falklands 12 June 1982, HMS Glamorgan (County Class DDG) hit by Exocet missile launched from land battery.

[Robert A Cook PE]

And both ships were “out-of-service” immediately: They could not float, find, fight, fire and flee. Might have been able to continue floating, for example, but not find 9radar and guidance dead) and fire. Might not be on fire, but still could not shoot back at future rounds.

[PAR35]

Vietnam 17 June 1968, HMAS Hobart (Adams class DDG) hit by three Sparrow missiles fired by aircraft of her putative ally.

John McCain has an alibi.

[PAR35]

And both ships were “out-of-service” immediately: They could not float, find, fight, fire and flee.

"The aircraft came around for a third attack run, but was scared off when Hobart '​s forward gun turret, under independent control, fired five rounds at the aircraft."

[PAR35]

Then there is the USS Higbee - North Vietnamese bomb destroyed the aft 5 inch mount but didn’t put the ship out of service.

[Robert A Cook PE]

Independent control from the turret.

Available then wasn’t it?