Author Topic: Naval Pictures III: Splice The Main Brace! (Read 255785 times)

wantec · « **Reply #1260 on:** 23 June 2017, 13:57:33 »

Quote from: ANS Kamas P81 on 23 June 2017, 11:31:57

Five of the seven sailors killed would have, thankfully, been instant when the ship struck; it's believed the other two were trying to rescue their shipmates when the order to seal the breach was given.

According to this article http://www.businessinsider.com/this-sailor-sacrificed-himself-save-20-lives-the-uss-fitzgerald-2017-6 the most senior of those killed was doing exactly that, helping rescue his shipmates. According to the article, 20+ lives were saved by Fire Controlman 1st Class Gary Leo Rehm Jr. when he went into a damaged section to get folks out. Looks like he had gone back in when the door needed to be sealed shut.

DoctorMonkey · « **Reply #1261 on:** 23 June 2017, 14:00:31 »

Quote from: wantec on 23 June 2017, 13:57:33

According to this article http://www.businessinsider.com/this-sailor-sacrificed-himself-save-20-lives-the-uss-fitzgerald-2017-6 the most senior of those killed was doing exactly that, helping rescue his shipmates. According to the article, 20+ lives were saved by Fire Controlman 1st Class Gary Leo Rehm Jr. when he went into a damaged section to get folks out. Looks like he had gone back in when the door needed to be sealed shut.

That sort of thing is in the finest traditions of sailors and navies the world over - running towards the danger

ANS Kamas P81 · « **Reply #1262 on:** 23 June 2017, 15:58:14 »

There's already a petition to name the next DDG after him.

As for Fitzgerald, her CO was asleep in quarters (which were struck during the collision) and the XO was not on the bridge at the time - it's not mentioned who the OOD was. Considering the late time it may have been a junior or understaffed watch aboard the container ship, or as the Japanese think entirely unstaffed. According to USNI, the Fitzgerald was "underway" at the time; my guess is that it was expecting the Crystal to pass and then the Fitzgerald would continue to the southeast away from the coastline. When the container ship made its first turn (about 20 degrees port) it lined itself right up with a collision course with Fitzgerald, with no warning. According to the Japanese press and USNI, it took the Crystal's crew a good 25 minutes before they were aware they hit anything, and did not find out about the ship until after they turned back to see what had happened.

A photo of the captain's cabin aboard Fitzgerald after the crash, who was apparently clinging to the outside of the hull and had to be rescued through the damaged hull. Talk about a wakeup-call.

Daryk · « **Reply #1263 on:** 23 June 2017, 16:49:09 »

30,000 tons on auto-pilot? :shudder:

I'll just leave this here:

Rule 5 - Lookout
Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper look-out by sight and hearing as well as by all available means appropriate in the prevailing circumstances and conditions so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and of the risk of collision.

DaveMac · « **Reply #1264 on:** 26 June 2017, 06:27:56 »

HMS Queen Elizabeth to start sea trials

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-40402153

Van Gogh · « **Reply #1265 on:** 26 June 2017, 09:54:25 »

Yesterday, Liner Queen Mary II started to race across the Atlantic in honor of the ships that brought the 1917 sammies to Europe.
On her departure from St Nazaire, a naval parade figured a military escort :
https://www.meretmarine.com/fr/content/bridge-les-images-de-la-parade-navale-brest-et-jusqua-saint-nazaire (nice pics, a couple of videos)

Wrangler · « **Reply #1266 on:** 26 June 2017, 10:47:34 »

I find it odd that the Queen Elizabeth has only a 40 aircraft compliment. Are they trying save money? The ship nearly as long and wide as the Gerald Ford is.

kato · « **Reply #1267 on:** 26 June 2017, 11:24:06 »

Quote from: Wrangler on 26 June 2017, 10:47:34

I find it odd that the Queen Elizabeth has only a 40 aircraft compliment.

The difference is hangar space, with in either case 20 aircraft are parked on the deck and the remainder (50 vs 20) in the hangar.

The USN plans 138 m² per aircraft at full complement (which is pretty much achieved with "triangular" parking of the aircraft as tightly as possible and if you want some room hoisting aircraft up to the hangar roof).
The RN plans 260 m² per aircraft, which allows a maintenance crew to actually walk around the aircraft and set up shop in one corner. The hangar in itself is slightly smaller (5200 vs 6900 m²).

Well, and cost-saving of course. Not only do those F-35 cost a ton of money, the Queen Elizabeth will also only have one-third the crew of Gerald Ford.

Kidd · « **Reply #1268 on:** 26 June 2017, 11:30:11 »

Quote from: Wrangler on 26 June 2017, 10:47:34

I find it odd that the Queen Elizabeth has only a 40 aircraft compliment. Are they trying save money? The ship nearly as long and wide as the Gerald Ford is.

Future growth it seems.

http://www.wired.co.uk/article/navy-queen-elizabeth-warship

Quote

It might seem contradictory to commission such big ships despite them having small crews and operating STOVL aircraft which don't need a big flight deck to launch and land. The size is due to the need to potentially refit for cats and traps if necessary. As Kyd says, it also gives the ship greater flexibility, not just in terms of the number of aircraft it can carry - he says it could carry more than 70 F-35Bs - but also the type of operations it supports (helicopters and Royal Marines for example) and potential innovations: "In the future you may see rack-and-stacking of tens, if not hundreds of UAVs," he says.

Can't really disagree with that.

glitterboy2098 · « **Reply #1269 on:** 26 June 2017, 15:46:30 »

given the F-35's many quirks at the moment regarding environmental effects and maintenance, being able to park your entire airwing inside the hanger deck (and thus out of the heat, cold, wind, rain, etc) seems like a wise idea too.

Daryk · « **Reply #1270 on:** 26 June 2017, 17:27:10 »

Quote from: Van Gogh on 26 June 2017, 09:54:25

Yesterday, Liner Queen Mary II started to race across the Atlantic in honor of the ships that brought the 1917 sammies to Europe.
On her departure from St Nazaire, a naval parade figured a military escort :
https://www.meretmarine.com/fr/content/bridge-les-images-de-la-parade-navale-brest-et-jusqua-saint-nazaire (nice pics, a couple of videos)

And commentary I can mostly make out without resorting to Google... thanks!

I am Belch II · « **Reply #1271 on:** 26 June 2017, 19:19:54 »

40 is the standard load for the QE carrier. It is kinda low, but there is more then enough room for overflow. It can easily put 60 or 70 on the ship with no problem. I don't think US carriers are holding 80 plus right now as a normal.

worktroll · « **Reply #1272 on:** 26 June 2017, 19:34:40 »

Timely! The HMS QE just left dock for sea trials. Squeezy? Let QE answer that herself:

Quote from: HMS Queen Elizabeth

Does my stern look big in this? #tightfit #QNLZatsea

Daryk · « **Reply #1273 on:** 26 June 2017, 20:40:09 »

Reminds me of pulling into Pearl Harbor aboard NIMITZ. We could see land below the catwalks on both sides...

Dragon Cat · « **Reply #1274 on:** 26 June 2017, 20:52:30 »

Royal Navy/Shipbuilders Note to self we have two years before Prince of Wales sails dredge the sea floor and widen the exit

DoctorMonkey · « **Reply #1275 on:** 27 June 2017, 01:51:45 »

I think she had to leave dock at high tide and then wait for low tide to get under the Forth bridges

glitterboy2098 · « **Reply #1276 on:** 27 June 2017, 02:00:20 »

yeesh. let me guess, that is the only shipyard able to build them?

Dragon Cat · « **Reply #1277 on:** 27 June 2017, 03:55:30 »

Quote from: glitterboy2098 on 27 June 2017, 02:00:20

yeesh. let me guess, that is the only shipyard able to build them?

the two ships have been built across the country but Rosyth is the Royal Navy's main assembly and finishing shipyard has been for years more than capable of the task I'm just surprised they didn't take into account the entry and exit

Kidd · « **Reply #1278 on:** 27 June 2017, 04:13:12 »

QE on track, excellent!

I think they did take it into consideration, and sometimes (most of the time) budget demands that people have to make do with the bare minimum. Anyway the important one is HMNB Portsmouth where the QEs will be home-ported, and that is being dredged and widened for their benefit.

Wrangler · « **Reply #1279 on:** 12 July 2017, 19:57:40 »

Here interesting picture: The HMS Dragon escorting the Russian Kirov Class battlecruiser ‘Pyotr Velikiy’ in 2014.

I guess I am too much of a romantic of navy ships, i still wish there were iconic ships like Kirov class still being planned and made. Navies nowadays seem to make what i would say rather generic ships in comparison.

I am Belch II · « **Reply #1280 on:** 12 July 2017, 20:29:34 »

I loved how the Kirovs looked over all of the Russian ships made. It being a huge ship along the lines of a battlecruiser size at 800 feet and it wasn't horrible cluttered like other Russian ships of the time.

Kidd · « **Reply #1281 on:** 12 July 2017, 21:03:12 »

Quote from: Wrangler on 12 July 2017, 19:57:40

Here interesting picture: The HMS Dragon escorting the Russian Kirov Class battlecruiser ‘Pyotr Velikiy’ in 2014.

I guess I am too much of a romantic of navy ships, i still wish there were iconic ships like Kirov class still being planned and made. Navies nowadays seem to make what i would say rather generic ships in comparison.

Minus Harpoons I see. Probably not much use against that monster anyhow.

You'll get over it; I had that reaction at first towards Arleigh Burke too. Here's Type 45 and Type 42.

Sharpnel · « **Reply #1282 on:** 13 July 2017, 02:16:26 »

The ship above is a mockup of the new Russian Lider-class 'Destroyer". At 17,500 tons she's closer to being a battlecruiser than a destroyer. She'll be very heavily armed with up 64 cruise missiles and an array of SAM systems that would be tough to get through.

Wrangler · « **Reply #1283 on:** 13 July 2017, 05:31:07 »

Reading the wiki, that thing going have nearly as many tubes as a Tico Class Cruiser and more than a current DDG-51 Class Flight 2 at total 120 tubes. Half dedicated to air defense and half to universal use for either Cruise missiles or anti-ship missiles. I thought initially she was suppose to be a Cruiser, but they changed their minds I guess. Russians do have thing about designations for ships and making them not quiet to what NATO classifies them. Their carriers were "heavy aviation cruiser" for a while.

12 nuclear powered destroyers will be very ambitious for them, given their economic situation. They kept shelving all the ships they say they were going to build.

DoctorMonkey · « **Reply #1284 on:** 13 July 2017, 06:04:24 »

the superstructure of that Lider-class is very reminiscent of the IJN's "pagoda" style for their battleships

Kidd · « **Reply #1285 on:** 13 July 2017, 06:51:31 »

The Lider is a shipbuilder's fantasy, the Russian Navy is going to focus on frigates like the Stereguschiy and Adm Gorshkov classes. More hulls, less eggs in 1 basket.

PLAN Type 55 would be more my concern...

Sharpnel · « **Reply #1286 on:** 13 July 2017, 07:41:27 »

More than likely true about the Lider. The Russian Navy is a mere shadow of what it was during the old Soviet Union. Build what you can afford to build and make t it good as can be. The Chinese are more pressing concern, though.

Weirdo · « **Reply #1287 on:** 13 July 2017, 08:31:15 »

I'll believe the Lider when it gets launched.

As for Kirovs, the reason they don't bold them like that anymore is because nobody wants/needs ships like that anymore. The Kirov class are single-purpose ships, built to kill other ships(particularly carriers) and do little else. Few navies are looking seriously at OSKing a Nimitz these days, and those that are tend to be trying cheaper methods than nuclear battlecruisers. And the navies that are building ships that big are going for carriers and assault ships, things that can give you a return on investment even when World War III isn't going on.

Weirdo · « **Reply #1288 on:** 13 July 2017, 08:38:02 »

What's the deal on the Type 55? Is it essentially a Chinese Burke?

(Not saying that disparaginly. It's safe to say that the Arleigh Burkes and their descendants are the most successful warships of the modern age, not exactly an easy club to get into.)

Kidd · « **Reply #1289 on:** 13 July 2017, 09:01:42 »

Quote from: Weirdo on 13 July 2017, 08:38:02

What's the deal on the Type 55? Is it essentially a Chinese Burke?

Chinese Ticonderoga in its intended role. Since the PLAN projects to have 3 CBGs, the idea (for now) is to build 6 of them with 2 nominally assigned to each carrier group; at least 1, eventually 2 T-55s will play escort commander and missile goalie for each of the next 3 PLAN carriers.

Still digesting its capabilities... IINM, it has a lot of chaff launchers and a more advanced ESM mast than was expected.

fullsize image here: https://s21.postimg.org/5arma2i6f/type55ship.jpg