Page 9 of 14 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 135

Thread: 1/5 th of the USN surface warships depart the Mediterranean Sea.

  1. #81
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    okla-freakin-homa
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    12,623

    Re: 1/5 th of the USN surface warships depart the Mediterranean Sea.

    Quote Originally Posted by ItAin'tFree View Post
    Maybe your "first hand knowledge" isn't what it once was. The T62 was an improvement over the T55 but not much and the Russians were never satisfied with it. That's why before the first T62 came off line they were already working on their next tank, the T64. I'm guessing you are talking about the Yom Kipper War? Yes The Israelies had some M60's but it wasn't their main battle tank. They had more of our old M48's at the time. But regardless, they had the edge in training and they made the Syrian Army pay dearly for their lack of training. The equipment edge wasn't the deciding factor.
    Oh my first hand knowledge is holding up well enough. Unlike the West, the Soviets didn't just upgrade a tank to death like we did the M48-M60's (you do know an M60 is just an upgraded M48 right?) they brought out whole 'new' tanks with new designations. but again my point was as a grunt facing the T62 at the Fulda Gap we were told the tank was superior to our M60s and had us greatly outnumbered. Even after the 73 war we were told the T62 was superior, just poorly used...

    But all soviet tanks of that era suffered from the same problems- cramped fighting compartment that hindered crew efficiency and caused excessive fatigue. Poor transmissions that ate themselves up, and high alloy engines that catch fire when hit. They also had a fatal design flaw mating the turret to the hull and had to store main gun ammo around the turret ring due to lack of room inside the tank hull.

    That didn't stop the gap guys from screaming the T62 was a diesel driven wraith...

    You are thinking of the '67 war when it comes to M48's not upgraded. By 1973 the M48's were brought up to M60 standards but the Israeli armor forces included large numbers of Centurions. Rather than claim superior training it was more like poor high command leadership... on the battle field the Israelis were fighting to the death and taking massive losses. Not until the Egyptian high command decided to leave the protective curtain of the SAM 6 umbrella did the Israelis have success in the Sinai. Without air support the Israelis were being torn apart, and unable to rescue the reservists manning the Bar-Lev line, and unable to push the Egyptians back all the while taking huge losses. Syria's big problem was a poor battle plan that drained their air defense system to the point the Israeli air force could operate over the Golan. In the beginning the Israeli armor was being wiped out, they fought bravely but were wiped out.

    I'm not knocking the Israelis but it was more a case of disastrous command decisions on both sides that shaped that battle. You might enjoy a good book on the subject- "The Eve of Destruction" by Howard Blum.

  2. #82
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    okla-freakin-homa
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    12,623

    Re: 1/5 th of the USN surface warships depart the Mediterranean Sea.

    Quote Originally Posted by OscarB63 View Post
    could you repeat that in English? I don't speak liberalese
    Apparently you struggle with english as well... your radical right filters need to be turned off... that wasn't anything but english....

  3. #83
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:02 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,330
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: 1/5 th of the USN surface warships depart the Mediterranean Sea.

    Quote Originally Posted by APACHERAT View Post
    All right, you win. I'm ignorant and there were no trouble in both the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf.

    After over thirty five years membership with the USNI I've canceled my membership and will never read another issue of "Proceedings" again.

    >" ABOARD THE USS ABRAHAM LINCOLN IN THE PERSIAN GULF — Desert dust blew over the flight deck of this aircraft carrier in powdery milk-colored waves, clogging plane engines, air intake valves, sight scopes and nostrils. Mixed with the slick residue of dripping hydraulic oil and grease from arresting cables, the landing surface was slippery enough to entice maintenance hands into body surfing.

    The fierce sandstorms that have slowed military operations in the Iraqi desert this week are also affecting air and naval operations. The sand, it seems, gets in everything, even ships at sea.

    In the dark, windowless Tactical Flag Command Center, Rear Adm. John M. Kelly removed his glasses and rubbed his eyes. Illuminated by the glow of intelligence read-outs and a muted television, Kelly listened grimly to his aides.

    "The Connie's deck is really getting clobbered," Cmdr. Larry Martin told his relief of conditions on the nearby USS Constellation, so lashed by wind and sand that one of its planes had just landed on the Lincoln instead. He rattled off names of airports in friendly Persian Gulf nations where carrier aircraft would be allowed to land if they got shut out by the increasingly foul weather.

    A few jets returned from airstrikes with damage to their canopies and engines. Shaken by the extended sorties over dust-shrouded enemy territory, pilots told of harrowing winds and whiteouts through which they would never have flown if there weren't ground troops in need of their cover.

    "We're maneuvering the carriers to get away from it as much as we can but sometimes there's no place to run," the admiral conceded. Six cycles of launches and recoveries had to be canceled on the three carriers, grounded by airborne grit, lightning and wind shear..."<
    Sandstorm Complicates Operations On Carriers - Sun Sentinel
    What you read does not matter, what you should do is stop commenting on the military since you so clearly have no clue about military matters. Let's recap in full:

    1: You claimed the surface force was being reduced by 20 %, when in fact it is getting larger.

    2: When called on that, you claimed they could not operate in the Red Sea or Gulf, despite having done so(note the moving goalpost). You further ignored that in the battle group is a cruiser and multiple destroyers.

    3: when pointed out that carriers can operate in both places, you claimed they could not because, OMG, the wind.

    4: When that argument is destroyed by the fact that amazingly, ships can turn, you bring up a sandstorm.

    5: I will now destroy that argument.

    Carrier ops are not easy. They require 100s of people to perform a nonchoreographed dance every time, and do it perfectly in bad conditions. Even the smallest mistake tends to end in injury or death. And despite this, vyvliv ops are the norm for carriers at sea. No one claims it will be easy, and the challenges tend to mount. A sandstorm is a thankfully rare challenge, so rare that a civilian paper actually covered the fact when one did happen. And yet, despite it being rare and people having to learn fast how to handle it, as your source points out:

    Spurred on by the imperatives of war, the war managers shuffled takeoffs and landings to make use of windows of calm, scratching less than 20 percent despite conditions many described as the worst they'd experienced in their flying lifetimes.
    Worst conditions many had ever seen, and still managegd a sortie completion rate of 80 %.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  4. #84
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Behind the Orange Curtain
    Last Seen
    01-30-15 @ 01:29 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    15,633

    Re: 1/5 th of the USN surface warships depart the Mediterranean Sea.

    Quote Originally Posted by Surtr View Post
    I don't see how it's a big deal. If the there was a real threat from a formidable enemy naval power, we'd have a hell of a lot more than a few destroyers out there.
    The intent of the thread is to show what a poor state the U.S. Navy is in today.

    Whereas the past 11 Presidents before Obama were able 24/7 for over sixty years were always able to keep a large number of U.S. Navy warships, amphibious ships and auxiliaries in the 6th Fleet AOR.

    Remember 9-11-12 and Benghazi, and there was only one destroyer on station covering the entire 6th Fleet AOR.

  5. #85
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:02 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,330
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: 1/5 th of the USN surface warships depart the Mediterranean Sea.

    Quote Originally Posted by APACHERAT View Post
    The intent of the thread is to show what a poor state the U.S. Navy is in today.

    Whereas the past 11 Presidents before Obama were able 24/7 for over sixty years were always able to keep a large number of U.S. Navy warships, amphibious ships and auxiliaries in the 6th Fleet AOR.

    Remember 9-11-12 and Benghazi, and there was only one destroyer on station covering the entire 6th Fleet AOR.
    Too bad your intent failed miserably since you proved to be painfully ignorant of what you where talking about. I still am laughing at you not knowing ships could turn...
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  6. #86
    double secret probation AngryOldGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Phx,Az
    Last Seen
    03-31-14 @ 10:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    2,917

    Re: 1/5 th of the USN surface warships depart the Mediterranean Sea.

    If they can turn they should get on with it
    turn round and come back to port

  7. #87
    double secret probation AngryOldGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Phx,Az
    Last Seen
    03-31-14 @ 10:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    2,917

    Re: 1/5 th of the USN surface warships depart the Mediterranean Sea.

    Quote Originally Posted by APACHERAT View Post
    Remember 9-11-12 and Benghazi, and there was only one destroyer
    c'mon dood just that one ship could have launched a cruise missile unto the target the former seal was lazing
    (if he could have transmitted accurate GPS coordinates?) and stopped the attack?
    Guess they were told to 'stand down' eh ?

  8. #88
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Behind the Orange Curtain
    Last Seen
    01-30-15 @ 01:29 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    15,633

    Re: 1/5 th of the USN surface warships depart the Mediterranean Sea.

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    What you read does not matter, what you should do is stop commenting on the military since you so clearly have no clue about military matters. Let's recap in full:

    1: You claimed the surface force was being reduced by 20 %, when in fact it is getting larger.

    2: When called on that, you claimed they could not operate in the Red Sea or Gulf, despite having done so(note the moving goalpost). You further ignored that in the battle group is a cruiser and multiple destroyers.

    3: when pointed out that carriers can operate in both places, you claimed they could not because, OMG, the wind.

    4: When that argument is destroyed by the fact that amazingly, ships can turn, you bring up a sandstorm.

    5: I will now destroy that argument.

    Carrier ops are not easy. They require 100s of people to perform a nonchoreographed dance every time, and do it perfectly in bad conditions. Even the smallest mistake tends to end in injury or death. And despite this, vyvliv ops are the norm for carriers at sea. No one claims it will be easy, and the challenges tend to mount. A sandstorm is a thankfully rare challenge, so rare that a civilian paper actually covered the fact when one did happen. And yet, despite it being rare and people having to learn fast how to handle it, as your source points out:



    Worst conditions many had ever seen, and still managed a sortie completion rate of 80 %.
    Re: 1.
    I made the claim now show me where I'm wrong. I'm using information from the U.S. Navy. By midnight tonight there will only be four destroyers in the 6th Fleet AOR. A 20 % reduction of U.S. Navy warships had occurred.

    Re: 2.
    Here's what I said in post #24.

    >"I know it's been done before but why don't we do it any more ? (In reference to carrier operations being conducted.)

    There are two reasons. It takes a large area to maneuver and carry out carrier flight operations. SOP is to put the carrier into the wind. The Navy still hasn't figured out how to control the direction of the wind. The Persian Gulf like the Red Sea are too small to carry out full carrier operations.

    But the biggest problem was all of the dust and sand that commonly is blowing across the Persian Gulf and Red Sea. It just does too much damage to our aircraft and our ships electronics."<

    Even during the Iraq war the Navy stopped carrying out carrier operations in the Persian Gulf because the lack of space for maneuvering, the heavy merchant ship traffic, the threat of sea mines and the damn sand storms.

    The Nimitz CSG has many of those same problems in the Red Sea. Could the Nimitz carry out 100 % carrier flight operations ? No, even if they were in the middle of the Pacific they couldn't because for the past three years almost every deployed carrier has been unable to put it's entire carrier air wing into the air to carry out combat operations. It use to be if you could put 90 % of the aircraft in the air the squadron / wing was combat ready. Today because of Obama's pre sequestration cuts, if you can put 50 % of the aircraft in the air, you meet Obama's combat readiness standards.

    BTW: 50 % of the deployed P-3 Orion squadrons can't fly either. No funds for maintenance and spare parts. I suppose the funding has been redirected for sensitivity training classes ? Even those have been exempt from cuts.

    Re: 4. The link to the article I provided quotes a captain of a carrier who said during a sand storm that the carrier had no where to run. The Persian Gulf like the Red Sea are small confined areas that are close to meeting the definition of being landlocked.

    Re: 5. See #4.

    Now I'm going to be a nice guy and provide a link to Marinetraffic so you can see in live time the position of most merchant shipping in the world. Now you know how busy the Red Sea is and is extremely crowded because every ship that transits the Suez Canal has to travel through the Red Sea.

    But you will notice that they no longer show the ships in the Red Sea or around the Horn of Africa. They stop doing it a couple of years ago because those damn Somali pirates were using the same website to locate ships to attack. But check out how crowded things are in the Persian Gulf. Have fun-> Live Ships Map - AIS - Vessel Traffic and Positions

  9. #89
    Professor
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    11-30-13 @ 07:05 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,293

    Re: 1/5 th of the USN surface warships depart the Mediterranean Sea.

    Quote Originally Posted by notquiteright View Post
    Oh my first hand knowledge is holding up well enough. Unlike the West, the Soviets didn't just upgrade a tank to death like we did the M48-M60's (you do know an M60 is just an upgraded M48 right?) they brought out whole 'new' tanks with new designations. but again my point was as a grunt facing the T62 at the Fulda Gap we were told the tank was superior to our M60s and had us greatly outnumbered. Even after the 73 war we were told the T62 was superior, just poorly used...

    But all soviet tanks of that era suffered from the same problems- cramped fighting compartment that hindered crew efficiency and caused excessive fatigue. Poor transmissions that ate themselves up, and high alloy engines that catch fire when hit. They also had a fatal design flaw mating the turret to the hull and had to store main gun ammo around the turret ring due to lack of room inside the tank hull.

    That didn't stop the gap guys from screaming the T62 was a diesel driven wraith...

    You are thinking of the '67 war when it comes to M48's not upgraded. By 1973 the M48's were brought up to M60 standards but the Israeli armor forces included large numbers of Centurions. Rather than claim superior training it was more like poor high command leadership... on the battle field the Israelis were fighting to the death and taking massive losses. Not until the Egyptian high command decided to leave the protective curtain of the SAM 6 umbrella did the Israelis have success in the Sinai. Without air support the Israelis were being torn apart, and unable to rescue the reservists manning the Bar-Lev line, and unable to push the Egyptians back all the while taking huge losses. Syria's big problem was a poor battle plan that drained their air defense system to the point the Israeli air force could operate over the Golan. In the beginning the Israeli armor was being wiped out, they fought bravely but were wiped out.

    I'm not knocking the Israelis but it was more a case of disastrous command decisions on both sides that shaped that battle. You might enjoy a good book on the subject- "The Eve of Destruction" by Howard Blum.
    The hull on a M48 and a M60 are just about the same, the turrets, not so much.

    Your post said M60's not M48's. Israel just didn't have all that many of them. Of the ones they had fact is many of the Israel tankers preferred the M48 over the M60. Perhaps because they had more experience with them but it was said the steel was harder because it was older (never made sense to me) and the silhouette was lower.
    "“If we don’t deepen our ports all along the Gulf — places like Charleston, South Carolina; or Savannah, Georgia; or Jacksonville, Florida…” -Obama

  10. #90
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Behind the Orange Curtain
    Last Seen
    01-30-15 @ 01:29 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    15,633

    Re: 1/5 th of the USN surface warships depart the Mediterranean Sea.

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Too bad your intent failed miserably since you proved to be painfully ignorant of what you where talking about. I still am laughing at you not knowing ships could turn...
    Do you know how stupid you sound ?

Page 9 of 14 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •