1. #1
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Flanders, NJ
    Posts
    13,537

    Default Uh-oh. I would get ready for some big booms in Jordan

    They probably are going to be sorry they did this:

    Attackers Fire Missiles at U.S. Navy Ship

    Aug 19, 9:11 AM (ET)

    By JAMAL HALABY

    (AP) The US navy vessel USS Kearsage, an amphibious assault ship, leaves the Jordanian port of Aqaba, ...
    Full Image



    AMMAN, Jordan (AP) - Attackers fired at least three rockets from Jordan early Friday, with one narrowly missing a docked U.S. Navy ship and killing a Jordanian soldier. It was the most serious militant attack on the Navy since the USS Cole was bombed in 2000.

    Another rocket fell close to a nearby airport in neighboring Israel, officials said. Jordanian and Israeli authorities said militants fired three Katyusha rockets from a warehouse in the Jordanian Red Sea port of Aqaba.

    A group linked to al-Qaida claimed responsibility in an Internet statement. The statement purportedly from the Abdullah Azzam Brigades could not immediately be verified.

    The U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet, based in Bahrain, said two American amphibious ships attached to the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit were docked in Aqaba, about 210 miles south of the capital, Amman, when the rockets were fired toward them.

    The vessels later sailed out of port as a result of the attacks, U.S. Navy spokesman Lt. Cmdr. Charlie Brown told The Associated Press in Bahrain.

    The Abdullah Azzam group was among several that claimed responsibility for previous attacks on Egypt's Sinai Peninsula, including the Oct. 7 car bombing of a hotel in the resort of Taba, which borders Israel, and the July 23 Sharm el-Sheik bombings that killed at least 64 people.

    "A group of our holy warriors ... targeted a gathering of American military ships docking in Aqaba port and also in Eilat port with three Katyusha rockets and the warriors returned safe to their headquarters," the statement said.

    The rockets were the most serious attempted attack on a U.S. military ship since the Cole bombing in October 2000, when suicide attackers detonated explosives on a small boat they brought alongside the destroyer as it refueled in Aden, Yemen. Seventeen U.S. sailors were killed.


  2. #2
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Flanders, NJ
    Posts
    13,537

    Default

    "Qaeda" group claims rocket attack on U.S. ships

    Aug 19, 9:10 AM (ET)

    The USS Ashland is seen at Aqaba port in Amman August 19, 2005. Two U.S. Navy ships sailed out of...
    Full Image


    DUBAI (Reuters) - A group claiming links to al Qaeda said on Friday it had fired rockets at a U.S. Navy ships in Jordan and an Israeli port, according to an Internet statement.

    The statement, which could not be authenticated, was signed by the Abdullah al-Azzam Brigades of the al Qaeda Organization in the Levant and Egypt.

    It was carried on an Islamist Web site not often used by other groups which say they are linked to Osama bin Laden's network.

    "A group of our mujahideen have targeted U.S. vessels in Jordan and (Israel's) Eilat port with three Katyusha rockets before safely returning to their base," the statement said.

    "Zionists are a legitimate target and we warn the Americans, who are spreading their corruption throughout the world and who have stolen the wealth of the Muslim nation, to expect even more stinging attacks.

    "This is our debut operation in Jordan," it added. "And as we have begun to destroy the throne of the Egyptian tyrant, we warn the Jordanian tyrant to release our jailed brothers and voluntarily abdicate before we force you to go."

    Earlier this month, the group was one of several organizations that said it was behind the bomb attacks on a market and hotels in the Egyptian resort of Sharm el-Sheikh. It has also claimed the October 2004 bombings at another Egyptian Red Sea resort.

    Three rockets were fired at two U.S. Navy ships in Jordan's Aqaba port on Friday. They missed their targets and instead hit a warehouse and a hospital, killing a Jordanian soldier, and struck the Israeli port of Eilat.

    A Jordanian security source said authorities were searching for three men after the attack, which was launched from an industrial warehouse area near the entrance to the city.


  3. #3
    MembersZone Subscriber
    MalahatTwo7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Loco madidus effercio in rutilus effercio.
    Posts
    12,837

    Default

    I heard about this in the news earlier this morning. I'm just glad that no one on the ships suffered injuries and that both sailed without incident. However, it sucks that they had to sail in the first place. Just means that one more port has been closed to allied naval shipping. Its gett'n so's a guy can't git a li'l RnR anywheres these days.

    Good luck to the crews onboard though. May the remainder of your tour be quiet.
    If you don't do it RIGHT today, when will you have time to do it over? (Hall of Fame basketball player/coach John Wooden)

    "I may be slow, but my work is poor." Chief Dave Balding, MVFD

    "Its not Rocket Science. Just use a LITTLE imagination." (Me)

    Get it up. Get it on. Get it done!

    impossible solved cotidie. miracles postulo viginti - quattuor hora animadverto

    IACOJ member: Cheers, Play safe y'all.

  4. #4
    Forum Member
    RLFD14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    562

    Default

    Part of me thinks they should not have left port..... One would guess (hope) that their best attack had more or less failed, that detection and attention would now be focused on preventing another attack, thus a repeat is not likely to happen. However, having left port in response to the attack, they just rewarded the attackers. Now we can expect this kind of thing to be repeated because it got results.
    You only have to be stupid once to be dead permanently
    - - - - - -
    I A C O J

  5. #5
    Forum Member
    Dave1983's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Gator Country
    Posts
    4,157

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RLFD14
    Part of me thinks they should not have left port..... One would guess (hope) that their best attack had more or less failed, that detection and attention would now be focused on preventing another attack, thus a repeat is not likely to happen. However, having left port in response to the attack, they just rewarded the attackers. Now we can expect this kind of thing to be repeated because it got results.
    I see your point, but its probably a good idea to remove thoese types of ships which I belive have little (if any) armor protection and very limited self defense systems. I think the Navy should now send a couple missle armed destroyers to the same port.
    Fire Marshal/Safety Officer

    IAAI-NFPA-IAFC/VCOS-Retired IAFF

    "No his mind is not for rent, to any god or government"
    RUSH-Tom Sawyer

    Success is when skill meets opportunity
    Failure is when fantasy meets reality

  6. #6
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    421

    Default

    I say they bring back the Iowa-class battleships and set them in the ports. Put the USS Wisconsin back into commission.
    -Bozz

    Air Force Medic

  7. #7
    Forum Member
    FWDbuff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Pee-Ayy!
    Posts
    7,412

    Default

    fdmhbozz: I say they bring back the Iowa-class battleships and set them in the ports. Put the USS Wisconsin back into commission.
    But bozzy.....Park the Mighty Mo, the Wisconsin, The Joizey, or the Iowa about 18 miles or so off the coast....That way, the 18 inch HE rounds can get more velocity...........
    "Loyalty Above all Else. Except Honor."

  8. #8
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,302

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FWDbuff
    But bozzy.....Park the Mighty Mo, the Wisconsin, The Joizey, or the Iowa about 18 miles or so off the coast....That way, the 18 inch HE rounds can get more velocity...........
    Too expensive. Smart bombs from an aircraft. For the price of putting a battleship in service you can use lots and lots of smart bombs.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  9. #9
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    421

    Default

    oops, I guess I did say *in* the ports. I meant near the ports, and 18 miles is close enough.

    You could use smart bombs, but why not use the 18"ers and cruise missles off the battleships? Its more impressive to watch those things fire than a bomb drop.
    -Bozz

    Air Force Medic

  10. #10
    Forum Member
    PattyV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    1,272

    Default

    I say they bring back the Iowa-class battleships and set them in the ports. Put the USS Wisconsin back into commission.
    There is a good reason why there are no battleships left nowadays. They are useless. Completely and utterly useless. The introduction of the aircraft carrier made them redundant. Remember WWII?

    On another matter, i heard a comedian (dont remember which so forgive me for poor refrencing) make a joke that went something like this: I dont get why the government spends millions of dollars for just a few bombs. Why dont they just pack the plane full of pennies and it will do just as much damage for half the price.

    I think thats a great idea.
    "There are only two things that i know are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And im not so sure about the former."

    For all the life of me, i cant see a firefighter going to hell. At least not for very long. We would end up putting out all the fires and annoying the devil too much.

  11. #11
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    421

    Default

    Did you know that the Gulf War was started by the firing of a Cruise Missle off of the USS Wisconsin?
    -Bozz

    Air Force Medic

  12. #12
    Forum Member
    PattyV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    1,272

    Default

    Did you know that the Gulf War was started by the firing of a Cruise Missle off of the USS Wisconsin?
    Here i was thinking it started when Saddam invaded a little country called Kuwait.
    "There are only two things that i know are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And im not so sure about the former."

    For all the life of me, i cant see a firefighter going to hell. At least not for very long. We would end up putting out all the fires and annoying the devil too much.

  13. #13
    MembersZone Subscriber
    MalahatTwo7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Loco madidus effercio in rutilus effercio.
    Posts
    12,837

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86
    Too expensive. Smart bombs from an aircraft. For the price of putting a battleship in service you can use lots and lots of smart bombs.

    Mmm ya. There is something to be said for a high explosive ordinance that just sorta flies up to your front door and "knocks" before it blows your house to bits! Too bad they dont have a hover mode in them so the onboard camera can see the look of shock just before it blows.

    "Whats that you say?" 'This Bomb's for you?'
    If you don't do it RIGHT today, when will you have time to do it over? (Hall of Fame basketball player/coach John Wooden)

    "I may be slow, but my work is poor." Chief Dave Balding, MVFD

    "Its not Rocket Science. Just use a LITTLE imagination." (Me)

    Get it up. Get it on. Get it done!

    impossible solved cotidie. miracles postulo viginti - quattuor hora animadverto

    IACOJ member: Cheers, Play safe y'all.

  14. #14
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    124

    Default Why the ship left Port?

    You don't leave a ship under fire sitting. A ship cannot maneuver sitting at dock. Thats why a ship always has a "watch section" on duty 24 hours. Whether its a storm or an attack, they can pull the ship out of dock.

    Jordan is a Middle Eastern country. We can expect to be attacked in any Middle Eastern country.

  15. #15
    MembersZone Subscriber
    EFD840's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Eclectic (no, NOT electric), Alabama
    Posts
    1,510

    Default

    There is a good reason why there are no battleships left nowadays. They are useless. Completely and utterly useless. The introduction of the aircraft carrier made them redundant. Remember WWII?
    Not exactly....

    One thing that is really missing from today's naval arsenal is offshore gunfire support. For a while, nobody seemed to notice that little OTO 76mm gun that is so popular around the world wouldn't even chip the paint on a bunker but times are different now. The US Navy is building better, longer range 5" (120mm) guns for the newest Burke destroyers and the DDX might carry a 6" (155mm).

    The Iowas carry nine 16" (406mm) that will blow the crap outta anything. SC is right, they won't be back because the crew manning requirements make them too costly but they would be very far from useless.

    As far as their vulnerability in today's environment, other than a submarine torpedo attack what would sink one? It took a combined 19 torpedo and 10 bomb (500 and 1000 pounders) to sink the Japanese battleship Musashi, which was similar to an Iowa but with somewhat weaker armor and much poorer damage control. The US Harpoon antiship missle has a 488 pound warhead, the French Exocet has a 360 pound warhead. Hit an Iowa with one of these and I doubt anyone on board would even feel it.

    There's an effort in congress to force the navy to reactivate one or more of these ships. I doubt it will pass but then again you never know.

  16. #16
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    124

    Default efd840....

    You left out the part about what ant-ship missles do. They penetrate and then explode unlike contact bombs. they also come in at about waterline level, unlike contact bombs. Believe me, they will more than feel it...

  17. #17
    Forum Member
    Dave1983's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Gator Country
    Posts
    4,157

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EFD840
    Not exactly....

    One thing that is really missing from today's naval arsenal is offshore gunfire support. For a while, nobody seemed to notice that little OTO 76mm gun that is so popular around the world wouldn't even chip the paint on a bunker but times are different now. The US Navy is building better, longer range 5" (120mm) guns for the newest Burke destroyers and the DDX might carry a 6" (155mm).

    The Iowas carry nine 16" (406mm) that will blow the crap outta anything. SC is right, they won't be back because the crew manning requirements make them too costly but they would be very far from useless.

    As far as their vulnerability in today's environment, other than a submarine torpedo attack what would sink one? It took a combined 19 torpedo and 10 bomb (500 and 1000 pounders) to sink the Japanese battleship Musashi, which was similar to an Iowa but with somewhat weaker armor and much poorer damage control. The US Harpoon antiship missle has a 488 pound warhead, the French Exocet has a 360 pound warhead. Hit an Iowa with one of these and I doubt anyone on board would even feel it.

    There's an effort in congress to force the navy to reactivate one or more of these ships. I doubt it will pass but then again you never know.

    Exactly. They are pretty much immune from ASM's (acording to Janes Naval Review). Dont forget, they were built to withstand 16" naval guns, wich pack something like 1500 lbs of armor piercing hi-explosive (3 times what todays ASM's carry). And with the CIWS they carry, they can shoot down SSM's. The actual threat to a BB is from either a submarine or bomber aircraft. Neither of which Al Qaida (?) or all the other wakos have.

    As for cost, how much does a 16" HE round cost? How much does a cruise missle or bomb loaded aircraft cost? Sure, a BB uses alot of fuel and I think the crew is around 1600, but "bullet for bullet, nothing is as cost effective.
    Fire Marshal/Safety Officer

    IAAI-NFPA-IAFC/VCOS-Retired IAFF

    "No his mind is not for rent, to any god or government"
    RUSH-Tom Sawyer

    Success is when skill meets opportunity
    Failure is when fantasy meets reality

  18. #18
    MembersZone Subscriber
    EFD840's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Eclectic (no, NOT electric), Alabama
    Posts
    1,510

    Default No, I didn't forget anything

    Quote Originally Posted by turnout733
    You left out the part about what ant-ship missles do. They penetrate and then explode unlike contact bombs. they also come in at about waterline level, unlike contact bombs. Believe me, they will more than feel it...
    I know I should just let this go, but I can't help myself...

    Modern ASMs use many different attack profiles. Some dive from high altitude, some are sea-skimmers, and use a sea-skimming approach and execute a 'pop up' manuver to strike the more vulnerable deck of its target.

    For the sake of argument, lets assume a sea-skimmer using a straight-in approach is launched at an Iowa class battleship. What's it gonna do? The Otomat, which is a widely exported ASM, has a published ability to penetrate 1.5" of steel armor.

    The upper armor belt on an Iowa, which extends roughly from the deck to the waterline is OVER A FOOT thick. Want to go for that pop-up attack? You've got to penetrate 8" of steel. By the way, there's also a 'dead space' area between the first two decks that will eat up the energy of your fancy shaped charge warhead before it hits anything at all. Finally, for fun the conning tower and turrets have over 17 inches of armor. You can check out the armor details here.

    Know what your ASM is to that kind of steel armor? A bug on the windshield

    If mere numbers don't do it for you, consider these points:

    Launch weight for a Harpoon, Exocet, Otomat, etc is roughly 1500 pounds with between 300 and 500 of this warhead and flies at a high subsonic speed. A Japanese Zero weighs 6,000 pounds, could carry a 250 lb bomb, and traveled at about 300kts. I'll let you decide which is the stronger weapon but it really seems something of a draw to me. On 11 April 1945, a Zero rammed the USS Missouri at just about the height a sea-skimmer would hit. It bounced off. You can see a picture of it milliseconds before impact here.

    Second point, as my Tampa brother pointed out, these ships were designed to withstand multiple strikes of high-caliber shellfire from weapons delivering a ton of armor-piercing steel at supersonic speed. A broadside could contain up to 14 of these shells. On 11 November 1942, the Washington and South Dakota (smaller predecessors of the Iowa class) engaged a Japanese task force off Guadalcanal that contained a battleship and several cruisers. The range was inside 4 miles - point blank - and thus the shooting was flat trajectory blasting. The South Dakota was hit 42 times by shells from 5" to 14" in size and never suffered damage that threatened her structural integrity.

    No, as Dave said, these ships would have nothing to fear but a submarine or a nuke. Those impressive History Channel video clips that show a modern destroyer or frigate sized ship getting broken in half by an ASM hit can't be used to judge those weapon's effectiveness against a late WWII US battleship. The BBs were built to a survivability standard that even today's supercarriers can't match. They aren't coming back but operational cost, not effectiveness, is the reason.

  19. #19
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    124

    Default

    Being a Naval Analyst must be a cool job. I spent many years in the navy and never met one.

  20. #20
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Memphis Tn,USA-now
    Posts
    5,436

    Default

    BTW,BBs have 16"inch rifles,not 18".The Japanese battleship Yamato had 18"guns and look where that got them.
    In 1985,just after the Achille Lauro hijacking was resolved by F14s from USS Saratoga forcing the plane carrying the hijacking bastards down in Sicily,my ship,USS Mahan DDG 42, pulled into Sigonella harbor for some liberty.
    That very day,we got notice that intell had heard noises about how someone was planning attacks on ALL US Navy ships in Sigonella harbor in retribution.
    I went up on deck and looked around.Yep,the only USN ship I could see,I was standing on.
    Our response was to have more armed roving patrols on deck,all four of the .50s set up and manned on a rotating basis,and everyone topside wore flack vests.
    You ain't scaring a bunch of destroyer sailors out of a good liberty port.

    Quote Originally Posted by FWDbuff
    But bozzy.....Park the Mighty Mo, the Wisconsin, The Joizey, or the Iowa about 18 miles or so off the coast....That way, the 18 inch HE rounds can get more velocity...........

  21. #21
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Memphis Tn,USA-now
    Posts
    5,436

    Default

    Yep,and the guy commanding used to have command of a little destroyer out of Charleston back in the 80s.Guess Wisconsin was his deep draft command.

    Quote Originally Posted by fdmhbozz
    Did you know that the Gulf War was started by the firing of a Cruise Missle off of the USS Wisconsin?

  22. #22
    Forum Member
    RLFD14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    562

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PattyV
    i heard a comedian ... make a joke that went something like this: I dont get why the government spends millions of dollars for just a few bombs. Why dont they just pack the plane full of pennies and it will do just as much damage for half the price.
    Just FWIW, The MythBusters revealed that a penny hitting you in the head won't kill you even if it is traveling at terminal velocity. However, *lots* and *lots* of them could be real inconvenient for the people on the ground.
    You only have to be stupid once to be dead permanently
    - - - - - -
    I A C O J

  23. #23
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    383

    Default

    Don't care if it would do damage or not. It would still leave skid marks in your shorts. Thank God nobody was hurt. I have a niece on the Kersage (sp.).

  24. #24
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    12,000 Feet Cooking...
    Posts
    186

    Default

    Just send the Mighty Mo over there and anchor her with in sight of the coast. Just to intimidate the terrorist a little.
    FOR HE WHO SERVES HIS FELLOWS IS OF ALL HIS FELLOWS GREATEST

    IACOJ

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Big Bad John
    By FireCapt1951retired in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-09-2004, 01:07 PM
  2. Are YOU ready for a 'FULL METAL CHALLENGE'?
    By BigRig in forum University of Extrication
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-01-2004, 05:53 AM
  3. Are you prepared for the big one?
    By BIG PAULIE in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 02-13-2001, 11:15 PM

Posting Permissions

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

Log in

Click here to log in or register