USAF bombing Chinese Navy

page: 7
3
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 29 2007 @ 01:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Vanguard223
 


Sorry didn't I mean to suggest Sea Dart wasn't already in the air and I bet your right that it was. I just wanted to point out the US or for that matter the UK hasn't got a perfect anti-missle system, which some people think they have. The UK also uses Phalanx.

There was a second Silkworm/Seersucker in the attack which failed and fell into the water if it had not the Glouchester probably wouldn't of destroyed it as I believe Sea Dart can only fire at one target at a time (2 missile at 1 target) although automatic reload is quick.

In the Falklands war Sea Dart destoyed 7 aircraft but failed to destroy any exocet missiles, probably because the exocets was fired at ships without Sea Dart. The escorts with sea dart didn't fire because of problems like another ship was in the way or the sea dart automatic system deciding it own ship wasn't in danger. Sea Dart was of course improved since, but will now be replaced with PAAMS (Aster) on the new type 45

PAAMS (Aster)
"The system is designed to defend against supersonic, stealthy, highly manoeuvrable missiles that could use sea-skimming or steep-diving flight profiles approaching in salvoes, simultaneously from several directions."

The only time a ship succesfully defended against an exocet was by using chaff and changing course.

I believe US are developing stealthy cruise missile due to the SAM threat




posted on Aug, 29 2007 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vanguard223
Nice spin but this account makes more sense as far as ranges and engagement times are concerned. Also, by this account, the Missouri may not have even been the target the missile.


The incident does seem strange, Phalanx has a range of about a mile.

www.ussmissouri.org... page 4
from this account it does appear to of got very close

"As the missile came closer it crossed astern, from starboard to port and appeared to becoming up the port side"



posted on Aug, 29 2007 @ 06:04 PM
link   
I wouldn't want to rely on the Sea Dart too much.






[edit on 29-8-2007 by mad scientist]



posted on Aug, 30 2007 @ 04:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by mad scientist
I wouldn't want to rely on the Sea Dart too much.






[edit on 29-8-2007 by mad scientist]


The link's not working.

If it's the one I saw, think it was the solid rocket booster fell off on launch.

Why you shouldn't think you missile defence system is always going to stop every missile, I guess why they have Phalanx on the ships as well.

Now the real problem if the US got into a fight with china is where would I get a replacement computer mouse from!!





 
3
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join


Haters, Bigots, Partisan Trolls, Propaganda Hacks, Racists, and LOL-tards: Time To Move On.
read more: Community Announcement re: Decorum