0bb91e No.624281
>>624266
They had to run it aground to avoid it to sink…
Has to be a new record.
42c82b No.624316
Didn't some US Navy collisions follow the deaths of Russian diplomats? There are rumours that the Russians can confuse US GPS systems. In the age of Stuxnet, that sounds actually reasonable. I'd really like to see reliable statistics on ship density versus collision rate around the world over time.
2efdea No.624330
>>624266
America is stacking to many ships in a small sea tile and is experiencing unit decay and stacking penalties.
3d806c No.624333
>On 8 November 2018, while returning from NATO exercises, she collided with the 250-metre (820 ft) Maltese-flagged oil tanker Sola TS and began taking in water.
>Seven sailors were injured in the incident and by late morning she had developed a severe angle of list to starboard side with most of the stern submerged
Why do sailors refer to their ships as female?
2a3876 No.624334
>>624333
Cause they retain a lot of water and like to be filled with seamen.
084b6a No.624339
>>624333
"Why are Boats Referred to as "She"?"
Connie asks: I am trying to find out why boats are always referred to as the female gender.. When and why did this practice start?
According to Yarns of the Sea, Legends, Myths, and Superstitions: Although women were considered to bring bad luck at sea, mariners always use the pronoun "she" when referring to their ships. Whether its proper name is masculine, or whether it is a man o'war, a battleship, or a nuclear submarine, a ship is always referred to as "she."
This old tradition is thought to stem from the fact that in the Romance languages, the word for "ship" is always in the feminine. For this reason, Mediterranean sailors always referred to their ship as "she", and the practice was adopted over the centuries by their English-speaking counterparts.
One source suggests that a ship "was nearer and dearer to the sailor than anyone except his mother." What better reason to call his ship "she"?
Thanks for the question, Connie!
b88e95 No.624340
>>624333
>be early strelok
>innanavy
>there were no women on board
>don't have a girl back home either because bitches are still bitches
>yet you're a man and have needs
>don't want to be a faggot, though
>one night after drinking, you're laying by the hull
>fuck, did the ship always smell this nice
>one thing leads to another and you pretty much have sex with the ship similar to that one guy that got drunk and ended up cumming on his mosin
>realization sets in
>you just fucked a boat
>she was nice though
>clean up after yourself and refer to the boat as a girl from now on
>some other sailors give you weird looks but you make up some philosophical bullshit
>it catches on and becomes a meme
>return to port and the meme spreads
>soon every sailor is seeing their ship as a cute girl or beautiful woman
>drunken brawls break out over some dumbass insulting another guy's shipfu
>the idea becomes cemented in tradition
Bonus:
>more artistic sailors decide to draw their ships as actual woman
>this spreads too
>early Kancolle is born
So in short, loneliness at sea, a desire to not be a faggot, and waifus. At least ships tend to be more competent than female sailors.
d8549e No.624362
I wonder how well a fleet of time-traveling 1940 Regia Marina battleships+cruisers without Radar would do against a CY+3 American CVG staffed almost entirely by women, homo and transexuals with Russians jamming GPS&wireless communications because Syria.
>>624340
<ywn headpat the fubuki
985fa2 No.624374
>>624266
So in this scenario and the one with the Fitzgerald, what happens with the private ship? Presumably, both of them were also damaged to a moderate degree. Does the gov pay them to avoid court?
ef6173 No.624375
>>624362
They could just render whole CVG combat ineffective by just ramming everything. It seems to me that military sailors nowadays think they are all in submarines, and therefore they cannot look outside.
d8549e No.624392
>>624375
Would the Italians play along though?
They should've been used to some degree of eyeball navigation despite being Italians in the military and all.
I wonder if they can get their artillery on target before the American crews finish arguing about who should fire what at the enemy in absence of their drunk ass superior officers.
2b61aa No.624398
>>624316
They navy doesn't use GPS to navigate unless they can't see the stars or sun because they know its a liability. Also I heard that the ship was moored and got hit when it was docked. Though it could have been misinfo.
0bb91e No.624421
>>624398
>Also I heard that the ship was moored and got hit when it was docked.
I heard it was when they entered port and a very classical "Fuck your rules, make way, I'm a WAAARRRRship" "Well I'm bigger and I can't stop, so…".
9ced9a No.624422
Would the best anti-ship weapon be a rocket carrying American wymen and niggers that would replace the target's crew?
0a7944 No.624423
>>624422
It would be sending sheboons over in a refugee ship.
9e38eb No.624427
This is a very embarrassing situation. They have technology and folks but they failed to see so maybe they are manned by the idiots.
3d806c No.624430
>>624340
>fuck, did the ship always smell this nice
>one thing leads to another and you pretty much have sex with the ship
wait no
those things don't naturally follow
8d6680 No.624431
>>624398
>>624421
>The tanker, which was heading northbound, contacted the frigate, heading southbound, to ask if they had a plan to safely pass them as they seemed to be on a collision course. The response was: 'We have everything under control.'
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-46150048
0bb91e No.624432
>>624431
This isn't much better…
b7c747 No.624436
>>624340
Yet another "try to explain history based on the little my ignorant ass knows in a LOL manner on le 8chinz"
084b6a No.624485
Thanks anon, I was just about to enjoy myself reading some fake LOL history on a Comoros ylang-ylang extraction appreciation forum.
Now back to talking about why 9mm is a superior cartridge compared to both 45. and 40mm for the umpteenth time.
985fa2 No.624561
>>624485
Little known fact, due to its superior ballistic properties and tendency to deform 9mm is actually more effective than sabot 105mm.
2b61aa No.624607
>>624561
What about a 105mm sabot for a 9mm projectile?
eb2276 No.624629
>>624431
>>624266
Press F to say goodbye to brand new destroyer.
The Norvegian have a full transcript and it's the usual. Captain was asleep a junior officer had the deck (they haven't said but want to guess it's sex?), destroyer was approaching the port at high speed (17 knots) in full stealth, beacon off, position lights off, refused to identified itself when the Sola radioed them, the Sola deduced it was the Helge Ingstad and repeatedly asked them to turn and warned them about the collision, the destroyer finally answered "they were on it" not even a minute before impact, the Sola started to try to avoid it.
The Sola basically ripped the port side open on the full length of the destroyer.
The Helge Ingstad had only an action station alarm on, radioed after 7 minutes later they had hit an "UNKNOWN OBJECT" and had no propulsion (duh with your engines full of sea water it ain't going fast no more), then a second message of abandon ship after 15 minutes and got it's headcount wrong repeatedly (so even basic shit like that).
A real submarine that was also returning to port, rescued the sailors (note that the submarine put it's beacon on the second they surfaced)while the tugs of the Sola (that were still there, it's right next to the port) and quickly dragged it to the shore.
Frankly it's a fucking miracle nobody died.
Sauce in bork:
https://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/i/4dkdWE/slik-var-de-dramatiske-minuttene-da-knm-helge-ingstad-krasjet-i-sola-ts
https://www.aftenposten.no/norge/i/zLKL15/KNM-Helge-Ingstad-fikk-flere-klare-advarsler-fra-tankskipet-for-ulykken
57f65f No.624634
>>624631
Nah all they need is a few Type 24s and it'll probably be over
a70ee5 No.624635
>>624629
So is the ship totaled with all of that water in it?
eb2276 No.624637
>>624635
Well it's a ship it can always be raised and salvaged.
But while doing that for older steel ships that were super costly in steel/wood works was a cost (more often time than cost really) effective decision, with a modern ship (on which steel works is arguably the cheapest part) it's questionable if it's not cheaper to just make a new one.
94f7dd No.624709
They need to start hanging the entire higher levels of command on these ships when this happens.
d8549e No.624723
If the mere presence of a sufficiently large civilian cargo ship is enough to sink just about any modern warship, how effective would a converted "civilian" freighter armed with Sea Sparrows and anti-ship missiles be?
a265f8 No.624725
>>624723
Psst, you there… Kraut… You're asking some dangerous questions right now. You remember what happened to the last German who did that, right? Just be thankful we're helping domestic industry.
084b6a No.624729
>>624723
>>624725
>Psst, you there… Kraut… You're asking some dangerous questions right now. You remember what happened to the last German who did that, right?
Hush my German friend, don't say that around here, you're going to get us both firebombed again!
1bb74e No.624730
>>624723
Look up "Q-ships" in WW1.
084b6a No.624755
>>624723
>>624730
I think the story of the commerce raider/auxiliary cruiser, the most successful perhaps being HSK8 Kormoran. (Ich denke es heißt Handelsstörkreuzern , Hilfskreuzern im Deutsche). I'm still learning German, so pls no bully
https://stories.anmm. gov.au/sinking_of_sydney/hsk-kormoran/
tl;dr
germans couldn't have a proper navy after WW1 so decided to make merchant ships in a way so that they can be outfitted with armament, all sneeky breeki like, and was able to sink an Australian cruiser in 1941 despite having to scuttle ship
eb2276 No.624768
>>624755
>Best Merchant Raider.
>Not the SMS Seeadler.
>Full-rigged sail ship.
>Breaks out the blockade.
>British sailors are mesmerised by Germans pretending to speak bork and somehow end up thinking the 105mm guns and torpedo tubes that wood carrier is carrying is just traditional bork craft.
>Terrorize the Atlantic hunted by all the fleet there.
>End up with so many prisoner, capture a french ship, fill it with them and send it to Rio as a prize.
>When the US enter the war there it's hunted by so many ship it's getting ridiculous so it somehow managed to get into the Pacific.
>Terrorize the Pacific.
>End up swept away and beached by a fucking Tsunami in French Polynesia.
>Captain and 5 men rigged a rowboat.
>Decide to sail to the Fidjis (3000km away…) and steal another ship and come back for it's crew.
>Get caught after having deceived it's way through the cook islands.
>Crew learns it via the BBC as the captain was famous by then.
>Capture another ship since rescue isn't coming.
>Sail to Easter island that was the rally point, crash land there.
eb2276 No.624906
>>624903
Yeah, they tried to beach it but it's too steep, each tide is dragging it out a sea a bit more.
I think it's the first NATO warship to be properly sunk in a collision.
Also this is quite something, what is modern day average merchantmen can sink a modern day average ship of the line that easily.
I'd be chink I'd order the insane amount of merchant ships they have to be fitted with this.
c81176 No.624924
>>624723
Why do you want to waste money when unarmed ships already sink American warships with impunity.
bb215c No.624931
The absolute state of modern navies.
I want Japan to get its balls back and recreate the IJN. Yamato 2 when?
ef6173 No.624957
>>624931
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=https%3A%2F%2Fresett.no%2F2018%2F11%2F13%2Fkvinner-politisk-korrekthet-og-knm-helge-ingstad%2F&edit-text=
>In the Armed Forces Forum No. 2 in 2017 it was read that "Four out of five navigators on frigate KNM Helge Ingstad are women".
>"It is an advantage to be many women on board. It will be a natural thing and a completely different environment, which I look at as positive, Lieutenant Iselin Emilie Jakobsen Ophus said. She is a navigation officer at KNM Helge Ingstad, wrote the Defense Forum.
b93269 No.624962
>>624957
>female crew members
Of fucking course.
THE ONLY GIRL THAT BELONGS ON A SHIP IS THE SHIP HERSELF
Why can't dumbfucks get that?
eb2276 No.624967
>>624957
>"Four out of five navigators on frigate KNM Helge Ingstad are women"
ce9211 No.624969
>>624931
as soon as my kid mellows out and decides politics is a better way to arm people than haphazardly made four winds. Who doesn't want a Yamato on steroids?
cb7fcf No.624974
>>624969
>Who doesn't want a Yamato on steroids.
We were close to having one with the A-150/Super Yamato.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_A-150_battleship
Imagine taking that design and modernizing it with good air defense, anti-missile systems, and anti-ship missiles.
I wonder how well seaplanes have evolved since WW2 or would giving her helicopters be better?
677b01 No.624975
>>624629
Jesus. I guess crashing in to civilian ships in extremely incompetent ways is not just an American tradition.
>>624957
>Estonia
Ebin. I know someone who lives relatively close by was actually on that ship.
I guess that is the end result when you make a ship entirely focused on getting rich Scandinavians drunk on cheap Estonian booze.
d8549e No.624982
>>624957
This is one of the few cases where anime shouldn't be real.
eb2276 No.624983
>>624974
>Imagine taking that design and modernizing it with good air defense, anti-missile systems, and anti-ship missiles.
Wait for the Admiral Nakhimov to come out of modernization and you will have one.
Should take a while though, it's basically a full rebuilt, they're only keeping the hull.
eb2276 No.624984
>>624983
>One salvo of 72 SS-N-33
>No more US Navy
802ab4 No.625000
>>624983
>28,000t displacement
>1x2 130mm guns
>76mm armor around reactor
>bunch of AShMs
Guided missiles ruined naval warfare.
c81176 No.625001
>>624984
>1 fleet of tankers and freighters
>no more US Navy
d8549e No.625009
>>625000
Are guided missiles a form of gun control for Western Navies?
After all they're smart munitions that never kill innocent civilians unlike dumb evil bullets.
ef6173 No.625023
>>624975
>I guess that is the end result when you make a ship entirely focused on getting rich Scandinavians drunk on cheap Estonian booze.
This is going directly to conspitard territory but I believe russian specops sank that ship, as it was attempting to smuggle something interesting to Sweden. Sweden and Estonia, after all, had extremely warm relations back in early 90's, and Russia was a Jeb Bush-tier mess.
https://www.thelocal.se/20070510/7257 (Sweden, nej satan)
http://heiwaco.tripod.com/epunkt218.htm
83004e No.625028
>>624903
At least it'll make a lovely artificial reef
4d9488 No.625039
>>624723
>fourth largest commercial fleet in the globe
>surplus of exocets
>large surplus of AIM-7s becoming obsolete for aircraft use due to AMRAAM
eb2276 No.625063
>>625000
>76mm armor around reactor
Kirov still have armor everywhere not just around the reactor.
It's a light plating (hence why it's designated a "battlecruiser" rather than "battleship") largely designed as NBC protection than against projectiles but it's still one of the last ships (the?) designed with actual armor.
It's the thickest around the engine areas and is multilayered.
It's also the last ship to use a twin turret as a main gun (and 20x 30mm Gatlings).
As for AShM they're just plain better than shells.
Nobody in the US wants to remember it but the Germans fired maybe twenty Fritz X AShM during WWII and nearly sunk 4 battleships… and 3 cruiser, 2 destroyer and an assortment of other ships.
Yes it's that stupid and it does means guns on ships died in autumn 1943.
But since most of those ships weren't US (British, the Italians ships when Italy switched sides, etc…) and most of the US battles were in the pacific where the Japanese were overcompensating for their tiny dicks, the US still thinks that AShM aren't a real threat.
And those had cute tiny warheads compared to Russian AShM.
Vid related. And remember those are training missiles… they don't have a warhead (you can literally see both of them overshoot the target after piercing it).
Just compare the amount of CIWS between a Russian capital and an US capital ship and be amazed.
At best it's 2 Gatlings per ship… VS 20 for a Russian ship!!!
5b5cea No.625081
>>625063
>As for AShM they're just plain better than shells.
That's exactly my problem, the introduction of effective AShM basically took the entire naval structure of human history and threw it out the fucking window. As long as you can fit some missiles on a boat, it's an effective enough tool.
>Nobody in the US wants to remember it but the Germans fired maybe twenty Fritz X AShM
I love the Fritz X, but if you really want to talk obscure guided weapons introduced early:
<ASM-N-2 Bat
Probably the first automated AShM, used radar to glide in on naval or prominent ground targets. Deployed too late in the Pacific to do more than hit a few merchants.
<Interstate TDR
TV guided drone bomb first used in late '44 in the Pacific. Bureaucratic fights almost caused the program to be cancelled, but the commander managed to convince higher ups to allow his unit to operate for one month. The TDR was controlled by an operator riding in a chase plane. When the TDR approached the target, the operator used a small TV screen receiving the TDR's camera feed to guide it to the target. The Navy considered it more or less useless, because they were content with just carpet bombing Japan and didn't need a precision strike weapon.
<Siemens torpedo glider
A wire-guided torpedo attached to a glider. After being dropped from an aircraft, the operator would adjust it's course to line it up with the target, then transmit a signal once a hit was likely. This would cause the torpedo to detach from the glider and enter the water as normal. Take a guess when this was first tested. Go ahead, guess. 19-fucking-15. The Armistice killed any interest in the project.
b806de No.625136
The Norwegian navy contacted Ardent Global, who did the Costa Concordia righting and refloating, but decided their bid was too expensive. They took a lower bidder, Boa Management, who anchored the boat to the shoreline with some wire that quickly parted under the force of the tides. Which is funny because the company that delivered the chains used for the Concordia job was headquartered just a few kilometers away from the wreck and they say they've got chain piled so deep they're worried about the dock sinking.
https://www.aldrimer.no/sjoforsvaret-ville-spare-penger-pa-bergingen/
23950a No.625155
>>624768
Now that's a nice story. I read up on it some more, and they're like cool modern day pirates. I did intend to say that the Kormoran was successful as an auxiliary cruiser/merchant raider in that it sunk a fully manned cruiser in battle.
010735 No.625170
>>624333
>Why do sailors refer to their ships as female?
Tradition mostly. It's gay to ride around in a man too. Wilhelm II, everyone's favourite autists, demanded one of his favourite german ships be refereed to as male.
010735 No.625173
>>624362
>I wonder how well a fleet of time-traveling 1940 Regia Marina battleships+cruisers without Radar would do against a CY+3 American CVG staffed almost entirely by women, homo and transexuals
Like a backwards Axis of Time?
a69011 No.625175
>>624962
What about the cock holsters you keep below deck
d8549e No.625178
>>624924
Because unarmed cargo ships can't sink targets on land.
b806de No.625188
>>625175
Those are called Marines.
93ee01 No.625191
>>625178
I dunno man, give them wheels or something. I mean if we can build cars that can float around a lake making a ship that can drive on land shouldn't be that hard.
078272 No.625208
>>625188
Coastal Rangers, in this case if I'm not mistaken.
947601 No.625211
>>625023
That's interesting, never actually heard of that before, but I don't know if I'd believe it because the risk vs reward assuming that there actually was something onboard is questionable. Sinking a ship with >800 people on board is just so risky, and it's frankly hard to believe that Russia would be competent enough to pull something like that off during that time.
c81176 No.625212
>>625178
>>625191
Why not sponsor a program for "women in marine engineering" and all the women are at least 50% negroid immigrants you paid to transport as refugees to the target country so they destroy ships before they reach the water?
965d23 No.625219
>>625063
So what happens when we loose two or three super carriers?
9c3de8 No.625223
>>625219
>US loses carriers
>US planes get replaced with lockheeb trash that can't take off with bad weather and burst into flames without even getting shot at
Bye bye American air supremacy.
For fuck's sage, I bet in a few years you can rebuild the IJN Kaga, load her up with zeroes and bully the entire US military easily.
d8549e No.625224
>>625219
Such a thing would create more jobs for the defense industry to build replacement supper carriers with special accommodations for pregnant mexican trannies.
965d23 No.625226
>>625224
Wouldn't the war be over by the time the first party ship gets delivered?
d8549e No.625231
>>625219
>>625226
Honestly now that I think about it the US in its current absolute state could likely declare war on Iran regardless of how well its military would not be equipped for such a job, they wouldn't have to kill a single enemy to win as long as American soldiers die enough Patriotic deaths to raise the defense budget and create new procurement contracts for Lockheeb and friends.
078272 No.625235
>>625223
>being this naive
>thinking Lockheed would actually manufacture them and wouldn't just run up obscene R&D costs into the trillions, to just funnel into their coffers
>Produce a single, operational prototype that promises unrealistic capabilities that the stacked AF review board approves of after their brides clear the bank
>Then Lockheed purposely charges an insanely absorbent per unit cost to trigger Nunn-McCurdy, thus cancelling any further acquisition as they walk away with billions in R&D "costs" and plan further "future projects".
eb2276 No.625243
>>625219
>So what happens when we loose two or three super carriers?
You wake up and realize the 1/1 European thing (100m/100 men, 140m/140 men, etc…) armed with Allison J102 missiles (1991 supersonic "flying target" that was never even considered and only was used as to prototype other shit latter on despite working) was the way to go except you lost 30 years and countless billions and now are actually behind even the fucking chinks that are just mixing Russian weaponry designs with bootlegged European ship designs.
Just imagine the amount of warship the USN could field it it used the crews and money of it's behemoths to field blue water VLS frigates with a big VLS? You'd have actual sea supremacy, with US ships in every port of the planet capable to blow up any 99% of the parliaments under 10 minutes with conventional weapons.
90b07f No.625267
>>625000
There is still a dim hope for gigantic CLGGs firing scramjets. The technology is mostly there, all is left is to build a prototype 420mm cannon that accelerates a guided 1000kg projectile to hypersonic speed.