This is subject that I find an odd one to talk about in the first real post. But it is a coincidence of events that I feel the need to talk about.
First a hat tip to CDR Salamander for this post. I give him the credit for planting the seed here. I'll even go as far as to reference the same point in the video he does The 7:45 mark of part 4 as posted on his site: footage of the rails HMS COVENTRY lined with everything that could throw lead down range.
The threat of the Falklands has not gone away. It has gotten worse. Instead of just worrying about air-launched cruise missiles as they did in the Falklands, there are coastal defense cruise missiles, submarine launched cruise missiles, RPGs from jet skis, mortars...the list goes on.
It doesn't take a war. The Hezbollah attack on the INS HANIT could just as easily have happened in peace time. The US Navy has had ships fired upon with RPGs. How long will it be before some takes a shot at someone coming into Bahrain? Or through Suez? Or the StroG?
So in this light, how are we supposed to feel about this? Full-disclosure: I am not a skimmer. Never have been. But if I were, I have have ridden pleny of surface ships in my day. The air defense battle requires, quick response, quick thinking, and layered defense. Taking away part of that network of defense strikes me as mad.
I'd want every weapon capable of defeating an incoming threat onboard. I'm sure the ESSM is fine, but does it have the ability to defeat an incoming RPG? How about a fast moving boat loaded with explosives? I have every reason to believe the CWIS can, because the army is evidently clammouring for them.
Watch the video. As CDR Salamander stated, pull up a chair with a cup of coffee. Watch through to the end. Then think about the cost savings of not putting the CWIS on ships.
Breaking my Flag
1 year ago
