US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Jeff Head

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Bernard said:
Possible expansion to the arsenal ship idea? Maybe arsenal/ missile defense ship based on the San Antonio hull. Park one of these in the U.S 7th Fleet.
Click to expand...
This concept was introduced in a detailed model by Ingalls three years ago in 2013.

Here's the article:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


The pictures showed liberal use of the new PVLS, with 214 cells along each side for a total of 248 cells. it shows the full size DBR for the vessel, and then show a elevator to a hanger deck for helos or Ospreys.

BMD-Ingalls-01.jpg BMD-Ingalls-02.jpg BMD-Ingalls-03.jpg

It would be a cool concept and would be nice to see a separate vessel built for each Carrier Strike Group. They could swap out the gun forward with a Rail Gun, and then add a couple of Laser CIWS amidships on either side on the aux decks.
 
Brumby

Brumby

Major
Jeff Head said:
This excuse that they somehow strayed over 50 miles off course into Iranian waters is just more utter nonsense. They are backing away from the mechanical failure reason and now throwing this against the wall to see if it will stick.

On these missions, the planning is in depth. Each vessel has multiple GPS devices and a charted course.

I have a close friend who is a former Lt. Cmdr. in the US Navy SEALs,, he posted the following to his own Facebook page and has given me permission to post the following.

"I rarely pull out my dusty old trident, but in this case, here goes. I was a Navy SEAL officer in the 1980s, and this kind of operation (transiting small boats in foreign waters) was our bread and butter. Today, these boats both not only have radar, but multiple GPS devices, including chart plotters that place your boat's icon right on the chart. The claim by Iran that the USN boats "strayed into Iranian waters" is complete bull$‪#‎it‬.

"For an open-water transit between nations, the course is studied and planned in advance by the leaders of the Riverine Squadron, with specific attention given to staying wide and clear of any hostile nation's claimed territorial waters. The boats are given a complete mechanical check before departure, and they have sufficient fuel to accomplish their mission plus extra. If, for some unexplainable and rare circumstance one boat broke down, the other would tow it, that's why two boats go on these trips and not one! It's called "self-rescue" and it's SOP.

"This entire situation is in my area of expertise. I can state with complete confidence that both Iran and our own State Department are lying. The boats did not enter Iranian waters. They were overtaken in international waters by Iranian patrol boats that were so superior in both speed and firepower that it became a "hands up!" situation, with automatic cannons in the 40mm to 76mm range pointed at them point-blank. Surrender, hands up, or be blown out of the water. I assume that the Iranians had an English speaker on a loudspeaker to make the demand. This takedown was no accident or coincidence, it was a planned slap across America's face.

"Just watch. The released sailors will be ordered not to say a word about the incident, and the Iranians will have taken every GPS device, chart-plotter etc off the boats, so that we will not be able to prove where our boats were taken."

The "strayed into Iranian waters" story being put out by Iran and our groveling and appeasing State Dept. is utter and complete BS from one end to the other." - Former Lt. Cmdr, US Navy SEALs
Click to expand...

Until the details are clarified it is difficult to pass judgement on the situation but there are some key elements that are troubling regardless of the details. Fundamentally as I understand US Naval procedures and international law, a warship (as in this case) cannot be required to consent to an onboard search or inspection. Even if they in error had navigated into Iranian territory, then it is simply innocent passage. Warship represents the sovereign power of the nation. If this had happened because of the restrictive nature of the ROE's in which the soldiers had to operate, then it is a failure of policy and leadership both with the Navy and the WH. In other words why conduct operations in an area when they are not permitted to handle such situations. It is simply seeking opportunities to be humiliated. It degrades the sovereign power of the US. Amazingly, the passive nature of the US administration in responding to the incident speaks volume.
 
Brumby

Brumby

Major
kwaigonegin said:
I'm not sure which is worse. That the boat truly strayed into Iranian waters as reported or they didn't and now there is a cover up by the DoD and state dept.
Click to expand...

Regardless, the Iranians actions were in violation of US sovereignty according to international law even if the vessels were within Iranian territory. The Commander's handbook on the law of Naval operations demonstrate in 2.1.1 and 2.2.2 that the Iranians broke international law in what they did and US response was simply pathetic.
upload_2016-1-16_15-15-33.png

The administration's reaction to this violation as a non event will undermine future US naval operations. The only saving grace is that it represents Obama's Carter moment rather than the US as a nation. Election has consequences especially when you elect someone with no clear demonstrated leadership record.
 
MwRYum

MwRYum

Major
Brumby said:
Regardless, the Iranians actions were in violation of US sovereignty according to international law even if the vessels were within Iranian territory. The Commander's handbook on the law of Naval operations demonstrate in 2.1.1 and 2.2.2 that the Iranians broke international law in what they did and US response was simply pathetic.
View attachment 23922

The administration's reaction to this violation as a non event will undermine future US naval operations. The only saving grace is that it represents Obama's Carter moment rather than the US as a nation. Election has consequences especially when you elect someone with no clear demonstrated leadership record.
Click to expand...
To boil it down, this is enough to constitute as an act of piracy (that's about the mildest charges one can think of) and by now, the Obama Administration should already come under heavy fire from the Republican-dominated congress, if not the media as well - by none of the usual suspects have yet take that big bite at it, even Fox News is unusually quiet...c'mon people, Washington and Tehran just handed out free ammo for everyone to shoot at them! Why no takers?

it's strange when you've somthing that's qualify as a bombshell, but all parties - even the most American-hating type, RT, Al-Jazzera and etc. - are too keen to move on to other topics and events instead.
 
Last edited:
Brumby

Brumby

Major
MwRYum said:
To boil it down, this should be constituted as an act of piracy (that's about the mildest charges one can think of) and by now, the Administration should already come under heavy fire from the Republican-dominated congress, if not the media as well - by none of the usual suspects have yet take a bite at it, even Fox News is unusually quiet...c'mon people, Washington and Tehran just handed out free ammo for everyone to shoot at them! Why no takers?
Click to expand...

I suspect is a case of being blind sided by the details rather than the meaning of "just what happened". Give it some time for the implications of it to sink in and we might see some reaction in that direction. I don't think the US would just let this pass without responding in some manner especially if the implications of it is understood in its proper context. Basically, Tehran challenged Washington to a game of chicken and the US just blinked.
 
P

PanAsian

Major
Brumby said:
Regardless, the Iranians actions were in violation of US sovereignty according to international law even if the vessels were within Iranian territory. The Commander's handbook on the law of Naval operations demonstrate in 2.1.1 and 2.2.2 that the Iranians broke international law in what they did and US response was simply pathetic.
View attachment 23922

The administration's reaction to this violation as a non event will undermine future US naval operations. The only saving grace is that it represents Obama's Carter moment rather than the US as a nation. Election has consequences especially when you elect someone with no clear demonstrated leadership record.
Click to expand...

That sounds suspiciously like a self-proclaimed right to gunboat diplomacy by the US which I doubt anyone subject to it would willingly agree to.
 
MwRYum

MwRYum

Major
Brumby said:
I suspect is a case of being blind sided by the details rather than the meaning of "just what happened". Give it some time for the implications of it to sink in and we might see some reaction in that direction. I don't think the US would just let this pass without responding in some manner especially if the implications of it is understood in its proper context. Basically, Tehran challenged Washington to a game of chicken and the US just blinked.
Click to expand...
This is 2016, not 1916, and people either pounce all over it within 24 hours or it just gonna sink, side-lined and forgotten...unless Wikileak blew the story wide open sometime down the road and The Guardian run a juicy story of it 12 hours before the Democratic Party convention...

So you could be right, if this one gonna sink and sidelined before the end of this month, we'll just have to wait who's gonna blew it open with a juicy story, sometime down the road...
 
Jeff Head

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
PanAsian said:
That sounds suspiciously like a self-proclaimed right to gunboat diplomacy by the US which I doubt anyone subject to it would willingly agree to.
Click to expand...
No, it would be nothing like that at all.

The fact is...a warship has the right, under international law...to innocent passage.

If these vessels had a navigation error (which I do not believe for a moment), or if they broke down and drifted (which I also do not believe for a moment) they would have had every right to either depart on their own accord, or to be towed away by their own vessels.

The Iranians boarding them and having the sailors kneel with their hands up is a gross violation of international law, and, in fact can easily be construed as a hostile act. Both the Iranians and the US have stated reasons for this action which simply do not add up, either logically, or according to law.

That it happened, and that such excuses were given...flies in the face of reason and every norm of international law on the high seas. That is why my friend who is a retired US Navy SEAL command officer said what he said. It is also why I have said that something different happened. We do not know what...but it is as clear as day that something much different occurred here.

So...

Speculating at this point what that might be is senseless and would result in a meaningless argument and discussion which violate SD rules.

Until we have more information that is credible...let's just let it rest at this point. Further speculation and discussion regarding it, unless something new is brought forward should stop now. It will only lead to accusations, arguments, emotion, flame wars, etc.

DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS MODERATION
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top