Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Wed 08/03/2005 View Tue 08/02/2005 View Mon 08/01/2005 View Sun 07/31/2005 View Sat 07/30/2005 View Fri 07/29/2005 View Thu 07/28/2005
1
2005-08-03 Caucasus/Russia/Central Asia
Russians Accidentaly Sink Own Baltic Flagship
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by Laurence of the Rats 2005-08-03 09:23|| || Front Page|| [11132 views since 2007-05-07]  Top

#1 Neukrotimy is a "Krivak II" class ASW frigate of 3,000 tons displacement, according to hazegray.org. That's a relatively small ship to be serving as a fleet flagship, but it's still something more respectable than a "patrol ship."
Posted by Mike 2005-08-03 09:45||   2005-08-03 09:45|| Front Page Top

#2 Could happen to anyone. Back in 1943, FDR was on a battleship to the Tehran conference and the Navy put on an exercise which included a simulated torpedo launch. The USS Porter came up along the Iowa and made its drill. Suddenly, there was a "whooooosh splash!" and an armed torpedo was headed straight at the Iowa. Fortunately, the Iowa was able to evade.

From then on, whenever the Porter joined a new task group, it was greeted with "Don't shoot -- we're Republicans."
Posted by Jackal">Jackal  2005-08-03 10:05|| home.earthlink.net/~sleepyjackal/index.html]">[home.earthlink.net/~sleepyjackal/index.html]  2005-08-03 10:05|| Front Page Top

#3 How about a pic of the "Keystone Sailors"?
Posted by Spot">Spot  2005-08-03 10:36||   2005-08-03 10:36|| Front Page Top

#4 As in the movie, "Hunt for Red October", the line, "You fool! You have killed us!", comes to mind....
Posted by BigEd 2005-08-03 10:52||   2005-08-03 10:52|| Front Page Top

#5 Basayev will claim credit later today no doubt and ABC will have the exclusive interview.
Posted by MunkarKat 2005-08-03 11:05||   2005-08-03 11:05|| Front Page Top

#6 Jackal, any links to this ... darkly amusing trivia?

... anyone wanna list all the Russian military FUBARs we can think of since the USSR's fall? :D

(The "Crew sells T-72 for voda" story does not count.)
Posted by Edward Yee 2005-08-03 11:09|| http://edwardyee.fanworks.net]">[http://edwardyee.fanworks.net]  2005-08-03 11:09|| Front Page Top

#7 The Iowa evaded a torp at close range? Ummm...
Posted by Chuck Simmins">Chuck Simmins  2005-08-03 11:20|| http://blog.simmins.org]">[http://blog.simmins.org]  2005-08-03 11:20|| Front Page Top

#8 Jackal -- in the Pacific in WWII, a US sub accidentally torpedoed itself. The only survivor was a lookout on the conning tower, who saw the torpedo curve back around.

Yeah, it can happen to anybody.
Posted by Robert Crawford">Robert Crawford  2005-08-03 11:25|| http://www.kloognome.com/]">[http://www.kloognome.com/]  2005-08-03 11:25|| Front Page Top

#9 Fortunately, the Iowa was able to evade.

No link, roumors has it the Iowa may have made 38 kts. during this incident.
Posted by Shipman 2005-08-03 11:32||   2005-08-03 11:32|| Front Page Top

#10 RC - I believe that was the Tang, wasn't it? The torp's rudder probably jammed and the thing did a big circle and hit near the back end.
Posted by Laurence of the Rats">Laurence of the Rats  2005-08-03 12:11|| http://www.punictreachery.com/]">[http://www.punictreachery.com/]  2005-08-03 12:11|| Front Page Top

#11 The story of the Willie D.
Posted by Mrs. Davis 2005-08-03 12:16||   2005-08-03 12:16|| Front Page Top

#12 You want links?

USS Porter's near miss of the Iowa

HMS Trinidad torpedoed itself

Google cache of USS Tang
Posted by Jackal">Jackal  2005-08-03 12:21|| home.earthlink.net/~sleepyjackal/index.html]">[home.earthlink.net/~sleepyjackal/index.html]  2005-08-03 12:21|| Front Page Top

#13 More info on the top speed of the Iowas here. Looks like 35kts is the practical maximum, but even 32.5kts is smokin' fast for anything that big.

I've seen another article somewhere--can't find the link--which said that the Wisconsin threw up a rooster tail on her full speed trial in the 1980s, like a 45,000-ton speedboat.
Posted by Mike 2005-08-03 12:23||   2005-08-03 12:23|| Front Page Top

#14 Found it!

When the ship got up to 26 knots, a rooster tail would start to appear. Vibration was reported, but only aft of frame 166 (where the aft transverse armored bulkhead is). Chief's quarters were pretty bouncy and the Nixie room was like standing on a jackhammer. I set my notebook down on a table to record some data and you can barely make out my handwriting.

Walking forward, the vibration almost totally disappears as soon as you cross the threshold at frame 166. By the time you get up near the anchor windlass room, you can feel a slight torque to the bow. An almost imperceptible twisting that can only be felt by people with excellent sense of balance. . . .

Posted by Mike 2005-08-03 12:36||   2005-08-03 12:36|| Front Page Top

#15 Yeah a speedboat that has 16" guns and can throw volkswagon sized shells over a hundred miles inland and can pretty much shake off 90% of all missles used today without a problem unless you happen to be on deck. I dont see why we cant modernize them to cut the massive crews down to a reasonable size pack on some more missles for longer penetration and use them as a direct assault platform. The majority of the planets major cities are in range of those big guns and her speed as a dash to theater weapon would be usefull.
Posted by C-Low 2005-08-03 12:48||   2005-08-03 12:48|| Front Page Top

#16 Much of the problem from the battleships stems from sustainability and range. The tomahawks used in DS I were only a stopgap measure. Their 16in. guns we're able to lay down 2 rounds a minute of fire (until the first 5 minutes were up approximately at which point you got 2 rounds a minute for the entire SHIP at best). In terms of ordinance weight on time to target it was easier to see an aircraft deliver the firepower necessary and more accurately (the guns were never very accurate to begin with). Top it all off with range, 30km-40km isn't very far inland.

To tell you the truth I dont see any modernized battleships coming out until railguns come out.
Posted by Valentine 2005-08-03 14:50||   2005-08-03 14:50|| Front Page Top

#17 Lawerence, the Tang was sunk by it's own torpedo but the Captain and several others survived. The Captain was on the bridge conducting a night surface attack and that's why he survived. He and several others were blown off the boat. I have the book detailing the Tang's exploits. a few men in the sub got out thrugh the forward escape hatch after the boat sank. I believe it was in relatively shallow water in the Sea of Japan. No one aft of the foeward torpedo room survived. The torpedo hit the stern on the port side and caused a fire that everyone between the foreward and aft torpedo rooms. That torpedo happened to be Tang's last one on that voyage. A real tragedy.
Posted by Deacon Blues">Deacon Blues  2005-08-03 15:40||   2005-08-03 15:40|| Front Page Top

#18 Having been an engineering officer onboard one of the Iowa class (hey, I chose my name for a reason!), I can tell you that the hulls and machinery were getting very long in the tooth. You get tired of patching fuel oil pipes that someone put his foot through or having firemains rupture every time the guns shoot.

I loved those ships, but their day has passed. Sob.
Posted by Dreadnought 2005-08-03 16:35||   2005-08-03 16:35|| Front Page Top

#19 What DN said. Hulls only have a finite lifetime, both in years and miles. Typically, BBs were designed for 20 years of peacetime service, with the ability to go another 10-20 after a big refit/rebuilding (all our WWI era ships were rebuilt in the 1930s, while the North Carolinas and South Dakotas simply scrapped around 1960). Wartime service is much less, of course. These ships are 60 years old. Granted, a lot of that was in mothballs, but even sitting still has some aging on the hulls and internal structure.

And we can't build new ones. I don't think anyone in the world has the ability to make 12.5" STS armor plate any more, or the 16" barrels. We would have to build all new factories. Then we'd have to train people to work them.

Then train people to actually use the guns. We've been without them so long there isn't much institutional knowledge any more. In fact, when the New Jersey was recommissioned for Viet Nam, finding gunners was so difficult the Navy considered making offers to ex-Royal Navy men (I don't think it ever happened, though).

I thought battleships are neat, but let them rest in peace. I wonder if they could strip the Wisconsin enough to tow it to Milwaukee?
Posted by Jackal">Jackal  2005-08-03 18:48|| home.earthlink.net/~sleepyjackal/index.html]">[home.earthlink.net/~sleepyjackal/index.html]  2005-08-03 18:48|| Front Page Top

#20 That's right, Dreadnaught, and don't forget the facacta powder system on the 16 inch guns that nearly took out IOWA. If we had a BB blow itself up, we'd never hear the end of it from the screaming lefties...

and this time they'd finally have point besides the ones on their heads!
Posted by Ernest Brown 2005-08-03 20:22|| saturninretrograde.blogspot.com]">[saturninretrograde.blogspot.com]  2005-08-03 20:22|| Front Page Top

#21 The russian navy is a crack outfit.

Posted by bigjim-ky 2005-08-03 23:58||   2005-08-03 23:58|| Front Page Top

23:58 bigjim-ky
23:49 bigjim-ky
23:48 Sock Puppet 0’ Doom
23:40 Jealet Jise3212
23:40 Jackal
23:39 Zhang Fei
23:36 Phil Fraering
23:33 Jackal
23:32 Zhang Fei
23:26 Jan
23:18 Jealet Jise3212
23:09 Silentbrick
23:04 Zhang Fei
22:57 2b
22:48 2b
22:42 Jan
22:40 rjschwarz
22:39 rjschwarz
22:37 Pappy
22:33 Cyber Sarge
22:31 49 pan
22:25 trailing wife
22:24 2b
22:23 Atomic Conspiracy









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com