Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Glint on December 22, 2003, 08:13:21 PM
-
http://www.pianoladynancy.com/recovery_usscole.htm
-
Link no worky.
-
Nice shots.Amazing what they can do.Sink a ship to save another.
-
Anyone know that music? I recognize it but can't put my finger on it; it's driving me nuts.
Cool pics.
-
Music from Braveheart i think
-
I think they used the same ship with that Royal Navy frigate that was beached, last year.
-
Pretty slick the way they do that. The Braveheart MIDI was a little much though.
-
USS Cole put out to sea on April 19, 2002 out of Ingalls Shipyard fully rehabilitated from the incident.
Here's the list of the men and women who were killed during this terrorist attack:
Hull Maintenance Technician 2nd Class Kenneth Eugene Clodfelter, 21, of Mechanicsville, Va.
Electronics Technician Chief Petty Officer Richard Costelow, 35, of Morrisville, Pa.
Mess Management Specialist Seaman Lakeina Monique Francis, 19, of Woodleaf, N.C.
Information Systems Technician Seaman Timothy Lee Gauna, 21, of Rice, Texas
Signalman Seaman Cherone Louis Gunn, 22, of Rex, Ga.
Seaman James Rodrick McDaniels, 19, of Norfolk, Va.
Engineman 2nd Class Marc Ian Nieto, 24, of Fond du Lac, Wis.
Electronics Warfare Technician 2nd Class Ronald Scott Owens, 24, of Vero Beach, Fla.
Seaman Lakiba Nicole Palmer, 22, of San Diego, Calif.
Engineman Fireman Joshua Langdon Parlett, 19, of Churchville, Md.
Fireman Patrick Howard Roy, 19, of Cornwall on Hudson, N.Y.
Electronics Warfare Technician 1st Class Kevin Shawn Rux, 30, of Portland, N.D.
Mess Management Specialist 3rd Class Ronchester Manangan Santiago, 22, Kingsville, Texas
Operations Specialist 2nd Class Timothy Lamont Saunders, 32, of Ringgold, Va.
Fireman Gary Graham Swenchonis Jr., 26, Rockport, Texas
Ensign Andrew Triplett, 31, of Macon, Miss.
Seaman Craig Bryan Wibberley, 19, of Williamsport, Md.
Sour
-
You can see by the pictures that they did build some kind of 'Shaped Charge' that was aimed at the ship. You couldn't get that kind of hole with just a boat full of explosives.
You really, really have to wait for good weather to get that across the Atlantic and into the Gulf of Mexico. The freeboard dosen't look like much more than ten feet!
-
Absolultly amazing that she didnt sink.
-
HOLEY CRAP! That's friggen amazing.
-
sourkraut: Here's the list of the men and women who were killed during this terrorist attack
Does an attack on a military target by a group that had previously declared war on the US constitute a "terrorist attack" rather than a military assault, however unconventional?
I would think that recognising the dead sailors as casualties of war for which they volunteered would mean honoring them more than classifying them as hapless victims of random act of violence that just happened to be there.
Whatever PC point of view may be promoted by the media, I'd say there is a difference being killed while in uniform in the line of military duty and being killed while shopping or having a dinner.
miko
-
http://www.pianoladynancy.com/adult_pics.htm (http://www.pianoladynancy.com/adult_pics.htm)
Name looks suspicious but its safe... There are no pics..
-
Originally posted by Dowding
I think they used the same ship with that Royal Navy frigate that was beached, last year.
HMS Nottingham, Type 42 Destroyer that hit a rock in the Tasman Sea east of Australia and came within a hairs breath of sinking. Same type of operation I believe.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2349449.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/2348839.stm
Gatso
-
Originally posted by Pongo
Absolultly amazing that she didnt sink.
Not really, it could been alot worse damage and still floated, unless being crappy by the design, which I don't believe from todays destroyers.
The damage seems to be restricted in quite a small area and a destroyer should be able to deal with it.
Amazing pics though
-
Originally posted by Fishu
Not really, it could been alot worse damage and still floated, unless being crappy by the design, which I don't believe from todays destroyers.
The damage seems to be restricted in quite a small area and a destroyer should be able to deal with it.
Amazing pics though
quite a small area? what are you on? That hole is over 30 ft long and 30 feet high.
(http://www.pianoladynancy.com/images/usscole80.jpg)
-
Pongo,
Well, from what I see, the damage is restricted well within one section of the ship, so there shouldn't be too much trouble stopping the flood from sinking the ship.
Structucally it doesn't either seem severe enough to danger cutting the ship in two.
The ship was also repaired in considerably short time.
-
look at the little people, war ships have been lost from way way way less damage that that.
-
here are better (larger) shots of the operation involving the floating drydock
http://community-2.webtv.net/pdenman/COLE/
here are 17 others:
http://www.allisonsheart.com/vet/vet.html
-
In a modern warship, that is not a killing blow. In time of actual war(Miko), it would probably been able to continue it's mission with onboard shoring, at least in an emergency.
-
Originally posted by Pongo
look at the little people, war ships have been lost from way way way less damage that that.
and people has learned
-
"In the aftermath of the explosion, the crew of USS Cole fought tirelessly to free shipmates trapped by the twisted wreckage and limit flooding that threatened to sink their ship. The crew's prompt actions to isolate damaged electrical systems and contain fuel oil ruptures prevented catastrophic fires that could have engulfed the ship and cost the lives of countless men and women. Skillful first aid and advanced medical treatment applied by the crew prevented additional death and eased the suffering of many others. The crew conducted more than 96 hours of sustained damage control in conditions of extreme heat and stress. Deprived of sleep, food and shelter, they vigilantly battled to preserve a secure perimeter and restore stability to engineering systems that were vital to the ship's survival"
This doesn't sound like a "Day at the Office" to me. The ship was in extreme danger of sinking and only saved by the professionalism of the crew.
-
No question about that, but look to your history for much worse damage on warships and the role they played.
-
Otto,
What else can you expect when theres a big hole on the side?
But sinking? threatening, sure, but realistically? not really.
For a reason ships are divided into sections by internal bulkheads which prevents flooding from one section to an another and by a design the ships should easily take flooding into one section.
I'd be very surprised if Cole isn't made like this, as it's been a stantard on warships for quite a while already.
Biggest threat would been the fires.
-
fishu is just pissed it didn't sink or blow up ...
-
Originally posted by Eagler
fishu is just pissed it didn't sink or blow up ...
I'm sorry if it bothers you when someones are trying to think it realistically, instead of instantly saying "amazing it didnt sunk" when seeing a gaping hole in the side of a ship.
USS Cole is not a plywood ship loaded with guns, just to sink when there appears a hole in the side.
It is designed to withstand damage as much as possible for it's size and has a trained crew just for this kind of situations.
The crew did a good job helping their shipmates and preventing further damage for the ship.
However I do not believe it was in an immediate danger of sinking, since it *should* be capable of taking that kind of damage and even worse.
Besides it floated from the port to open sea where they could load it on the freighter.
(http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/ships/destroyers/cole/cole-towed.jpg)
More information in here: http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/news/news_stories/cole.html
-
Guys why are you arguing with fishu, He is the expert of all things military, just ask him.
I'd rather depend on the word of those who were there and telling how hard and long a job it was to save that ship.
Miko,
Does a "group" have a legal position to "declare a war" against a recognized national state? If so, then your premise might have some validity but I don't think they do. I believe a war is a violent conflict between political states. Could be wrong. Given that a state of war did not exist and cannot then it isn't an act of war.
-
if slick hadn't reduced the fleet of naval tankers, shore re-fueling ( in a terrorist filled country) would never had been needed and 17 young lives would be here today to enjoy Christmas with their families .... and these pictures would never had happened.
Hope that fact is included in his "legacy".
-
If you knew anything at all about warship design, you would know fishu is correct. Seems like you are disagreeing with just to start an argument.
-
Maverick: Miko,
Does a "group" have a legal position to "declare a war" against a recognized national state? If so, then your premise might have some validity but I don't think they do. I believe a war is a violent conflict between political states. Could be wrong. Given that a state of war did not exist and cannot then it isn't an act of war.
Self-recognised. We recognise whoever we want and refuse to recognise others and any other group of people can do the same. It's irrelevant in this context.
Just because a bunch of people who declared war on us did not have an offcicial recognition from US government (which it did - it is on the list of hostile entities), it does not mean our military does not perceive it as a threat or treats them as civilians when it has a chance to blow them up.
Al-Qaeda is a military organisation or at least it has a military wing. Which is a bunch or armed and trained people prepared to do violence.
It does not even matter whether we recognise them as military or not because the notion of "terrorism" is defined by its target, not its isource. So as long as we recognise the distinction between our military and out civilians, that's all there is.
Terrorism is a violent attack on civilians and civilian property for political goals.
Attack of military on another military is just an armed conflict. More valor is attributed to people who (volunteer to) serve in military because they stand ready to be involved in such a violent conflict.
Japain attack on Pearl harbotw as not a terrorist act. The french resistance' attacks on german soldiers were not terrorist acts.
The distinction is only semantic - though it may have some legal implications - but I though that the right use of words is important, as well as honoring teh dead sailors as fallen warriors, not victims.
Civilian victims would have left the premices if they expected the attack. The sailors would have stayed on USS Cole even if the attack was expected. That makes a huge difference.
miko
-
Originally posted by Eagler
if slick hadn't reduced the fleet of naval tankers, shore re-fueling ( in a terrorist filled country) would never had been needed and 17 young lives would be here today to enjoy Christmas with their families .... and these pictures would never had happened.
Hope that fact is included in his "legacy".
LOL...
So he IS responsible for the Navy but not for the Army that squashed Iraq... got it.
Eagler gave m a chuckle for Christmas.
-
sry, miss the humor of 17 dead kids ...
-
Originally posted by Nilsen10
If you knew anything at all about warship design, you would know fishu is correct. Seems like you are disagreeing with just to start an argument.
Most of us know that war ships are built with water tight compartments dudly. Its amazing how those plans seem to often fail when they have thousands of pounds of exposive applied to them. This one didnt.
Maybe you idiot euros think that I was using "amazing" as in "It never should have stayed afloat" but I was using amazing as in "WTFG what an excellent ship and crew."
So take your condecending crap home. That hole would have sunk many ships. It would have sunk any "destroyer" that deployed to the falklands and probably any Euro built destroyer of that generation. I would have sunk the whole norweigian navy, clown
THATS AMAZING
-
Eagler: if slick hadn't reduced the fleet of naval tankers, shore re-fueling ( in a terrorist filled country) would never had been needed and 17 young lives...
And if the government did not unconstitutionally confiscate the land from private owners to have the politically-connected developers build the World Trade Centers towers, there would have been no 9/11 or the first WTC bombing.
Imagine the highjacked airplanes flying through and missing the towers because... they were not there...
They would fly above the rooftops of whatever buildings would have existed there and looked like complete idiots...
Imagine the terrorists arriving with the explosives-filled van and discovering they have to dig a 7-storey deep tunnel to detonate it at the same location!
Without those acts, the OBL would have still been our friend and Taliban a recognised government receiving US help and Hussein would not have been a tyrant oppressing his people.
:rolleyes:
miko
-
Having just finished serving aboard an Arliegh Burke class DDG (USS LABOON DDG-58) I can tell you that that hole is huge and could for sure cause the ship to sink due to it's location (the large open area of the galley/mess decks and an entire engine room) Alot of other parts of the ship were damaged due to the shockwave from the blast both internally and externally (mainly electronically) I can't get into too much detail about the stuff that was damged and how severly (don't want to lose my clearance). It was the bravery,knowhow, and persistance of the crew that kept that ship afloat. We learned alot of hard lessons about this class of ship from this incident. And since then there have been modifications to improve survivability..The fact that we refuel in aden,yemen is a political thing not due to lack of tankers..they are available if needed. just 2 months before the incident my ship had refueld there twice. kinda scary since they have tried in some way to get EVERY ship that has been there since their original target USS THE SULLIVANS was there in january of that year. Thank the good Lord that things didn't work out for the terrorists while I was a sitting duck. Never forget the crewmembers that died that day.by the way how did this subject come up 3 years after it happened?
-
cool rider. I'm glad you ticket didnt come up too.
-
Jeeez Pongo, did you wake up on the wrong side of the bed this morning?
"Maybe you idiot euros think that I was using "amazing" as in "It never should have stayed afloat" but I was using amazing as in "WTFG what an excellent ship and crew."
So take your condecending crap home. That hole would have sunk many ships. It would have sunk any "destroyer" that deployed to the falklands and probably any Euro built destroyer of that generation. I would have sunk the whole norweigian navy, clown
THATS AMAZING"
:D :D :D
-
Originally posted by Pongo
Most of us know that war ships are built with water tight compartments dudly. Its amazing how those plans seem to often fail when they have thousands of pounds of exposive applied to them. This one didnt.
Maybe you idiot euros think that I was using "amazing" as in "It never should have stayed afloat" but I was using amazing as in "WTFG what an excellent ship and crew."
So take your condecending crap home. That hole would have sunk many ships. It would have sunk any "destroyer" that deployed to the falklands and probably any Euro built destroyer of that generation. I would have sunk the whole norweigian navy, clown
THATS AMAZING
*Wondering what Pongo thinks of the durability of the City Class Frigates and Iroquois Class Destroyers*
The analogy to the Falklands is not entirely accurate. HMS Sheffield survived the initial impact of the Exocet that got her...it was the resulting fire that destroyed the ship. Admittedly the warhead on an Exocet is no where near as large as that which hit the Cole, but anyway.
One of the other destroyers sunk in 1982 (can't remember the name off hand) was hit by three of four 1000 pounders from an A4 Skyhawk. A WWII cruiser would have a hard time surviving that.
I will give you all the benefit of the doubt on this one...the reference to "amazing" in the initial post was, I believe, a reference to the damage control efforts of the crew, without which the Cole would most certainly have been lost regardless of how well subdivided she is. Case in point is the Taiho sunk in '44 at the Marianas Turkey Shoot or Lexington at Coral Sea.
Taiho was a large carrier, presumably appropriately subdivided, presumably appropriately armoured. She was hit by one 21inch torpedo from a sub, and survived the initial hit. Damage control failed to vent avgas fumes and she exploded. So, "toughness" of the ship was defeated by poor damage control.
Lexington took a beating at Coral Sea and, other than failing to vent avgas and fuel fumes, damage control did a stellar job. But again she was lost to an oversight/error by her crew.
-
I would have sunk the whole norweigian navy,
Besides the fast patrol boats..the largest ships of the Norwegian Navy are frigates built in the 60's to a modified FAILED American design so it wouldn't take much..but try aiming a harpoon or exocet or any ASCM in those Fjords..background clutter would protect them:D
-
LOL, very true coolridr..
They are old, and have crappy engines. All electronics are new, and we are expecting a new class of stealthy frigates from 2005.
Fast patrol boats with infrared missiles and torpedoes + modern diesel/electric subs + mines and coastal missile batteries are the main effective elements we have today. The frigates are just sitting ducks and are mostly in service to produce personel for the new class.
-
Eagler: if slick hadn't reduced the fleet of naval tankers, shore re-fueling ... would never had been needed and 17 young lives would be here today...
GScholz: The USS Cole was saved by her excellent crew and the ignorance of her attackers. Although the suicide bombers were fanatically determined they were luckily not very bright. They detonated the bomb amidships, had they detonated the bomb near the bow or stern they would likely have set off the Mk. 41 VLS magazines
No, GScholz - that is not the case. Due to certain policies of Clinton or maybe the republican Congress the ship was positioned a few yards off and the attackers' blast did not detonate the magazines.
Of course if Clinton did not reduce the fleet of naval tankers, it would have been even better. Imagine the suicide bombers arriving at location, pushing the button and then belatedly realising there is no american ship there at all! That would have been so funny! :rolleyes:
miko
-
Originally posted by Eagler
sry, miss the humor of 17 dead kids ...
I wasn't laughing at dead kids, but you knew that. I was laughing at you're lame attempt to politicize the attack. One of us wasn't paying due attention to the sacrifices of the fallen... and it wasn't me.