US Navy spend 12 HOURS trying to sink retired warship by hammering it with missiles
 

USS Thach was fired upon from air, sea and underwater last Thursday in the exercise known as SINKEX.

The retired ship was hit with over 5,000 pounds of high explosives as ships, submarines and aircraft from the US, Canada, Australia and South Korea took part.

The 31-year-old frigate, which was retired in 2013 was towed to an area 55 miles north off the coast of the tiny mid-Pacific island of Kaui before testing commenced.

Video taken from a helicopter shows Australian frigate HMAS Ballarat and American cruiser USS Princeton firing harpoon missiles at the vessel.
US aircraft also joined in with US Navy F/A-18 Hornets dropping a 2,000-pound Mk. 84 bomb and a US Air Force B-52 bomber also bombarding it a GBU-12 Paveway laser guided 500-pound bomb.

A submarine from the US also joined in striking the target with Mk.48 torpedoes from below the waves.

The USS Thach finally sank at 7.25pm on July 14, in waters around 15,000 feet deep.



Not so ship shape! US Navy spend 12 hours trying to sink retired warship testing missiles | World | News | Daily Express

http://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/sZ4AAO...PIT/s-l300.jpg

PS:US coast good protected :1orglaugh

raising sea levels sinking the ship

Looks like they only hit it a few times but it took 12hrs to sink..

Tough little ship..

If this were a Russian test the submarine would of sunk first..

in Russia, it looks like this

Cool :thumbsup
Skip to 2:00

yes like this too :1orglaugh
PS:they using old expired missiles, it's cheaper than to build plants for utilization of these missiles.

The us army is such a fuck up I would not be surprised if the ship re-surfaced tomorrow...

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

And fire one missile over Serbia causing nation wide panic and declaring unconditional surrender to "who ever did this". :1orglaugh

Cause it's a floating piece of shit.


USA = great build quality, hard to sink :thumbsup

the US army is a bigger scam than US healthcare LOL its pre-subscribed to loosing, just look at any country you "liberated" LOL

why didn't they keep this ship ? it's hard to sink...

lol you do realize they aren't trying to sink the fucking ship with one shot? it's training for the many branches of military to practice using their weapons systems. sure if it sinks with one lucky shot then bravo you did good but that isn't the goal. hence the reason so many countries were involved with the sinking of the ship. :1orglaugh

I'm non-military and even I worked that out right away, I'm surprised it took so long for someone to post what you said.

Two missiles were fired and it looks like the first bounced off!

yeah would have been an awesome training exercise if they put it down in one shot. Wonder what crucificow's Navy is sporting these days? leaky dingies?

no it mid-flight engine bounced off
http://s017.radikal.ru/i429/1607/ef/c45391c134ea.png

the engine hit the ship first?

did they not show what hit the aft of the ship? I assumed torpedo, but apparently that makes a different kinda of boom

now that is a waste of my tax dollars I can get behind.

2 missiles, just different trajectories. therefore a different effect.

I thought there were two.

Boom :)

An old good Х-41 ("mosquito") aka SS-N-22 Sunburn, and it was not even equipped with a tactical nuke, which is "A MUST" to be used against the US aircraft carrier ballet groups according to the Russian military doctrine. FYI, an average power of anti-ship tactical cruise missile warhead is worth of 10 Hiroshimas. Ну это чтоб уж точно на глушняк :)

and you do realize that everywhere the US army has ever fought, things have gone from bad to worse to utter joke...so I would not be surprised if the shit was to re-surface :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Wrong. If this was a Russian test, mainstream media would stumble over eachother to spin it into a horrible act of war and you would be the first to believe it.

i thought the military doctrine around tactical nukes was for the use of defense in an area being invaded. My understanding was it was more a political statement meant to specify they will only use tactical, and only in that situation, and that would clarify the 'unknowns' of nuclear warfare.. etc etc

you are saying they have a doctrine to only attack carriers with tacticals?

How about you list these places, shell shocked coward Serb.

aircraft carrier is a weapon of attack and invade yes :1orglaugh

good thing none of the attackers got hurt during the exercise

Actually it came from the Soviet military doctrine and there is nothing about politics. Russia considers aircraft carrier battle groups useless in case of the full-scale conflict with another superpower. They (the aircraft carriers) are still useful in small conflicts like we have in Syria, but not against the USA. We had two aircraft carriers and sold one of them to China, because nobody here expects Midway-style ace combats anymore. The fastest and cheapest way to sink a 4 billion dollar ship with 5,000 men aboard is a small tactical cruise missile which flies about 5 meters above the sea surface with almost 3 Mach speed. It just can't be intercepted, especially if it's not alone... That's very simply and effective. Once again - no politics there, but just a military concept of efficiency: get more for the less.

Course not. The old evil Soviet military doctrine was allowing the use of nuclear weapon for defensive purposes only, the new doctrine allows to use them for attack - e.g. preventive strikes against missile defense systems like the one in Poland. Sounds funny but it's a fact, if Obama or Putin will accidentally fart, some unrelated Poland will be nuked :)

P.S. An amusing video of flying torpedo made by Soviet rocket genius of 60's (yes, it has to be equipped with a nuclear warhead):

I still didn't get it too. Are their missiles so shitty, or their ships are so cool? I would keep the ship and hang up by balls that man who made those useless missiles - he's definitely a cheater or just an idiot who knows nothing about rocket technologies.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...alm_statue.jpg

you basically fucked up the entire continent of asia in one way or another :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

that ship will re-surface as new and probably sink half your fleet :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Thats what I thought, juvenile punkass Serb. :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh :1orglaugh

no seriously, it will probably form some sort of ship terrorist organization and blow shit up...the US army fail game is strong :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

I bet if serving navy were to fescue this scale metal boat it would make a fucking splash all over country. Just like north Koreans and 1950s diesel U-boats...

What does america have against asians? Serious questions being asked here...you either cold wared the fuck or invaded and bombed the fuck out of everybody except india...the brits starved india tho ROR!

Your country sure has some serious beef with asia...maybe its you guys who are the assholes? ROR! Give it some thought...

Have you considered that that was the goal?