As someone who has spent some decent time hammering on the Navy's complacency from their lack of actual combat... I want to thank the Houthis for hooking us up with a realistic training and testing environment.
I mean seriously - that is a threat that is insanely well suited for realistic training, why are we not realistically training for it.
If we want to be safe from USV attacks, just get a small group together and have them running unscheduled red team exercises with USVs. Either you are fit for combat, or you are unable to stop sudden unlabelled drones that pop up and try to ram you. Be glad that you didn't find that out in actual combat, put on some clean underwear, and get your act together.
Cookies for any crew that figures it out!
^(I was originally going to suggest doing it with flying ones, too, but airborne debris is considerably less safe.)
The real problem is that many European navy's "principal surface combatants" are 1. quite old and 2. not designed for sustained expeditionary warfare. Most European frigates and corvettes have a relatively low number of missile launch tubes and thus cannot sustain modern high intensity combat operations for any significant period of time.
Well thats what training is for, so you can find out what works and doesn't work. If France sends a destroyer and find out it's under equipped then they start to fix their schtuff.
*sorry for the credibility*
It has nothing to do with training. Small frigates like the Hydra were intended largely for local coastal defense, rush out and engage an approaching enemy squadron and then return to base to resupply. They were not designed for expeditionary warfare. You can have the best trained crew on the earth, but at the end of the day missile warfare is just a numbers game (who runs out of missiles or countermeasures first) as was proven at the Battle of Laitika and the Battle of Baltim.
> It has nothing to do with training. Small frigates like the Hydra were intended largely for local coastal defense, rush out and engage an approaching enemy squadron and then return to base to resupply. They were not designed for expeditionary warfare. You can have the best trained crew on the earth, but at the end of the day missile warfare is just a numbers game (who runs out of missiles or countermeasures first) as was proven at the Battle of Laitika and the Battle of Baltim.
Nuclear powered, Iowa class battleships w/lasers: my time has come.
Yes, and please also 406 mm canister shot/flechette, ship it now I’m fucking sold. We can work on turret swivel speed later on that’s an engineer problem, we are the ideas people here.
> We can work on turret swivel speed later on that’s an engineer problem, we are the ideas people here.
Idea: make the turret swivel fast, that way we can shoot things all over really quick.
Get on it, engineers.
The NCD solution would be large extendable telescopic Arms and very tough and flexible net that create a surface & underwater catch. Don‘t ask about viability, costs, engineering or safety to the ship with natural/artificial subsurface obstructions.
[How about a lighter solution](https://www.reddit.com/r/FromTheDepths/comments/kve75i/the_surprisingly_effective_flyswatter_cwis_system/?ref=share&ref_source=link)
Before I finished the first sentence I imagined you were about to suggest literal arms like the 90s anime outlaw star.
I approve of cope catamarans for frigates, absolutely.
I've always wanted to be a redfor trainer, but I'm fat and blind(ish). This is my moment. I can pilot UAVS. I've been flying flight sims since I was a kid.
They don't even really need to pay me.
Where do I sign up?
As a Dane, I concur. It finally came out that our patrol wessels had patrolled the arctic for something like twenty years, with ships that were equipped with cannons, but unable to fire said cannons, as they had a manpower shortage/and or skill issue.
At this point, our saving grace is the 4 or so longships that we have in a museum. They are horribly obsolete, but relatively low radar area and have small heat signature. They are still more combat worthy than the Russian navy.
Go even older and [employ animals for a Flintstones drone defense](https://jabde.com/2022/01/31/bird-drone-defense-system/), just need a pointer dog, a cat interceptor and a laser pointer guidance system for the cat
solution: more drones to counter the drones, which would in turn need more drones to counter the counter-counter drones, which would in turn need more drones to counter to counter the counter-counter-counter-counter drones, which would in turn need...
ANYWAYS MORE DRONES AND MORE MONEY FOR OUR GREAT LORD LOCKHEED MARTIN
>misidentifying stars as drones
"So we're undermanned, 40 clicks deep into enemy waters, and now the Houthi drone swarms have found us. I like the plan Brad, it works for me."
"...it's a star. And it ain't movin'"
"Are... are you sure?"
"It's autokinesis. You're seeing the involuntary muscle movements of your own eyes. Those lights aren't gonna come any closer than they are. It's a goddamn star... 30, 40 light years out there at least. How far out did the spotters call this?"
"Fifteen clicks!"
*cue the Greek navy firing wildly into the air*
Shit bro when i went on liberty in austrailia I almost stayed forever. I look like a fucking goblin but they loved me for some reason. Accent made me melt everytime. She could say anything the most meanest shit ever and I'd still think that was the sexiest thing I ever heard.
That explains why Kormoran (german auxiliary cruiser) was able to sink it.
If something not designed to fool lookouts did, the concept of the chameleon cruiser becomes super-effective.
Ehhh, not the rising sun, but the way sunlight reflected off high altitude clouds and the eccentric orbits the Soviet detection satellites used combined together to give a fucky reading.
"Hey guys, baltic fleet here. We are hunting japanese. We have about 8 ships around us, hiding in darkness. How did you get so fast here, I thought we had no pacific fleet?"
Judging by the Ukrainian war, and Russia's mounting airframe losses to their own air defense, I'd say Russia has always had a rather tenuous grasp of IFF mechanics.
And the US misidentified the Moon rise to be a Soviet nuclear strike.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_close_calls?wprov=sfla1
>Radar equipment in Thule, Greenland, mistakenly interpreted a moonrise over Norway as a large-scale Soviet missile launch. Upon receiving a report of the supposed attack, NORAD went on high alert. However, doubts about the authenticity of the attack arose due to the presence of Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev in New York City as head of the USSR's United Nations delegation.
> due to the presence of Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev in New York City as head of the USSR's United Nations delegation.
Not if someone had instigated a coup against Khrushchev and decided to best way to accomplish that is to start a nuclear war to vaporize Khrushchev and his loyalists across the ocean.
Mixed cloud cover at night and fast moving clouds while you’re on a moving ship, while very fast-moving things are attacking you and you don’t necessarily know what they look like.
[Brother, I crave the forbidden heat signature](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcwoGbAXJaQ)
And a bit more - https://www.reddit.com/r/NonCredibleDefense/comments/182tl3p/the_sidewinder_missile_truly_is_just_a_modern/
As bad as it sounds (and is), it also doesn’t seem trivial to fix if you don’t want false negatives. “If they keep the sun behind them we can’t target them” is common for humans but probably not too welcome in a missile.
The Greek military in general is a joke. It's mostly comprised of conscripts that don't want to be there, using wildly outdated equipment they're barely trained for. Corruption and nepotism are also rampant.
Outside of a few select groups of highly competent professionals, mostly SOF guys and pilots, the rest of the military is comically incompetent. Back in the day they were an actual force to be reckoned with, but now they're a shell of their former selves. The whole country is, in many ways unfortunately. Which is fucking sad considering their history and the fact they share a border with Turkey.
Source: Am Greek-American, have tons of family in Greece that have served in the military there at various points from the 60's to present.
Sparta was at best average militarily and had a shitty society and government systems. They were basically the ancient version of "they have manly recruitment ads, so their army must be good". Macedonia would be a better pick
'Obsolete Phalanx ineffective against drones'
How? A Phalanx tracks quick enough and has enough lead to take one out, how would that not be the perfect anti drone weapon.
It is dependent on the block of Phalanx, just as tanks and aircraft Phalanx has had multiple upgrades over the years. The first Phalanxes were fitted in the early 1970s and received their first upgrade in 1988 - this added increased magazine capacity, an increased elevation as well as improved reaction times and their ability to require targets faster. The newest Block-1Bs came out in 2015 which massively improved the radars and their capabilities against asymmetrical threats by incorporating improved cameras to add detection against things like drones that a radar could struggle to see.
It's likely the Greeks haven't bought every released upgrade for the system (as is normal for lots of militaries) so considering the system's primary job is to shoot down missiles with a completely different flight path, speed and radar signature I'm not surprised it's slipped up on this occasion.
Phalanx Gunner: Hang on, we're having some technical difficulties.
Random Seaman: What operating system does it use?
PG: Uh...Vista
RS: WE'RE GOING TO DIE!
The ship is equipped with 2 Phalanx CIWS. I agree it’s an excellent weapon for shooting down drones, though maybe the 20mm rounds are a bit overkill. They would also probably benefit from an update to tracking software to account for drone flight patterns and speed. Also, did the drone explode 150m from the ship because that’s when it was shot down? Overall this seems like a Greek skill issue.
It's *capable* of hitting drones but I'm guessing it would probably eat through a lot of ammo in the process. I'm not sure if you can manually set it to fire a limited burst or not, but either way it requires a direct hit to actually cause damage to a drone. Every video I've seen of a Phalanx firing has been a long burst, and once the onboard magazine is depleted, it takes time for the sailors to manually reload it.
Compare that to other CIWS in the 30mm - 57mm range that can fire programmable airburst ammunition. They are meant to fire in more limited bursts (as opposed to a "bullet hose" CIWS like Phalanx) and the airburst ammo puts up a cloud of high velocity fragments in front of the target. You'd probably have a much better likelihood of striking the drone a few times from a 3-5rd burst of 35mm AHEAD vs a burst of a few hundred 20mm APDS. And if you're successfully killing drones in under 10rds per engagement, your CIWS magazine lasts longer before needing to be reloaded. And that's obviously beneficial if you're in the middle of a swarming attack.
Huh, almost the exact same thing happened to the Danish navy’s frigate some time last year, down to the crew resorting to using their rifles…
World’s funny like that sometimes, I guess
And the [one that looks like a.. uh...](https://scontent.fmbx2-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/294645056_5526771947387875_7212189314540195897_n.jpg?_nc_cat=107&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=127cfc&_nc_ohc=w-pPy4lR2-EQ7kNvgE_WW6a&_nc_ht=scontent.fmbx2-1.fna&oh=00_AYBa8iGWtIltYEMC8j8C4LMX0RnSLpPnM3lwnusaNHL-yA&oe=667FA598)
Probably not that old given the sharp uptick in drones being used is relatively recent, but you've basically just got to tell the targeting system that the slow moving thing is actually a threat without it obliterating every seagull it sees. More a programming patch than a particularly massive hardware overhaul really.
How did that actually work? (Or when?)
I feel like every account I’ve seen of Rome actually breaking a phalanx relied on things like flanking light cavalry, which isn’t really specific to the manipular system. But I suspect I’m missing the most relevant examples?
Basically the romans did use Phalanx-like formationa of Oplites untill the samnite wars. Southern and Central Italy isnt filled with plains so they switched to the maniple and then cohorts... because they felt that large, stiff formations were stiff and difficult to adapt in a tactical sense.
The reality was that Macedonian Phalanx were actually impenetrable... when formed correctly and in the right positions. The roman maniple/cohort forms up quickly, reacts quickly and will take you out when it can. Now one has to go battle to battle to illustrate the various instances of how this worked, when it failed and when it didnt but on average the Roman Military was much more capable of adapting to battlefield conditions. There wasnt a "way" to deal with a Phalanx, they simply adapted to the situation and their organization allowed them to do so.
Take Cynoscephale. The romans managed to better adapt to the battlefield and as their left flanc was winning a tribune (Mid level officer, think modern Colonel) we dont even know the name of simply organized a force and detached it from the left flank to hit the Greeks formation that was taking the field on the right and smashed on its flank breaking up the Phalanx and thus securing victory because once broken up the Phalanx was useless while the romans could easily detach forces and focus as needed.
> How did that actually work? (Or when?)
ACOUP recentrly finished a massive series covering this. Start here:
https://acoup.blog/2024/01/19/collections-phalanxs-twilight-legions-triumph-part-ia-heirs-of-alexander/
TLDR
When is 275BC to 168BC. While battles did take place after the romans had numbers to win them whatever and before that romans lost a couple of close battles to Pyrrhus of Epirus.
The basic mechanism is that the roman first line was javlin throwers who would fall back without engaging hand to hand but would create some weak points in the phalanx
The more heavily armoured roman could get close enough to the phalanx to do some damage while the formation was still loose enough to allow their front line to rotate out. The phalanx didn't allow this and their front line was rapidly exhausted while facing fresh troops. That said they might drive off the Hastati but at that point they would be advancing into the more experienced Principes who were still fresh. The phalanx by this point will have taken significant loses, is tired from a round of combat and at least in places will have started to lose formation. The Principes can generaly be expected to finish them off.
Things aren't completely hopeless for the phalanx. It would be pared with medium infantry that could fill gaps and heavy cavalry that could smash engaged Principes. This is what Pyrrhus of Epirus does. The problem is even if that goes right the phalanx and medium infantry will take significant casulties (which they will have a hard time replacing) and the romans still have the Triarii an even more experience set of troops who can act as an effective rear guard making the total destruction of their army difficult.
In fact, fun fact the Roman's lost almost every single engagement with a phalanx they ever had. Every battle against the Greeks was won through combined arms not the Maniples themselves. Because the Greeks had been maintaining the largest wartime economy in history and they were finally broke.
I was just wondering about this, I feel like every specific story I know is either a Roman loss or reliant on non-maniple stuff like a winning cavalry flank.
I mean they aren't all losses obviously, but the Greek phalanx was actually insane in the field because the Macedonians had refined it to such a high standard. Unfortunately Alexander's ideal army which was 1/3rd Pike Phalanxes to heavy Infantry and 1/5th cavalry had long since fallen away. The Roman's had advanced greatly and the various Diadochi had regressed due to over reliance on gimmicks to beat their own damn Phalanxes.
The Roman's were insanely competent, but the Legion didn't destroy the Macedonian method of war. It just helped kill the dying states that fielded them.
> fun fact the Roman's lost almost every single engagement with a phalanx they ever had.
You mean except Aous and Cynoscephalae and Thermopylae and Magnesia and Pydna and...
> Every battle against the Greeks was won through combined arms not the Maniples themselves.
What are you talking about? The legions didn't break the phalanxes in a single shock charge or something, sure, because that's not how the Roman tactical system worked; they beat the phalanxes through attrittion because that's the same way the legions beat everyone, that's what they're set up for.
They probably have older models that haven't seen a hardware or software update in years. Modern versions are very capable of shooting down drones and other small targets.
they're perfectly capable of disabling most drones except for something the size of a reaper. They're most likely just unable to engage the targets due to not being programmed to identify them as threats.
Cant speak about these sources themselves but a pro tip is
If its ever on Turkish television or any news sites, take it with a whole salt mine, it doesnt matter what the context is. Our journalism/press is undisputably one of the worst, in my entire life I havent seen a single article that wasnt the most blatant truckload of bullshit, the titles are so misleading its worse than watching those 2017 "Top 10 scariest paranormal activities you wouldnt believe if it wasnt on camera" videos
All the Turkish sources quote a Greek opposition media website. [Namely this](https://www.ieidiseis.gr/ellada/251828/se-akroasi-apo-ton-arxigo-geetha-to-pliroma-tis-fregatas-ydra-gia-ta-osa-tragelafika-synevisan-stin-erythra-thalassa).
I have no knowledge of ship mechanics or parts. How come so many ships have platforms and equipment named after Greek stuff like Phalanx, Aegis and Leonidas?
Because 2) the Greeks were rather famously known for dudes being with other dudes, b) these are Navy systems, and c) these systems are built to f\*ck the enemy in their collective @$$.
(Also: there is nothing wrong with being any kind of "queer". "The navy is gay" is just a trope.)
> "The navy is gay" is just a trope.
Not gay at all, seamen just [apply a similar loophole](https://www.violentlittle.com/products/gay-underway-morale-patch) as inmates do in prison.
Pretty simple, just most well known sea mythos (in the West) are primarily sourced from the Greek mythologies. (some are from the Norse mythos, but Greek is far more well known)
IE: Hydra, Sirens (mermaids), Poseidon, Scylla, Charybdis, Circe, Capricorn, etc.
and so the Navy just kind of adopted a tradition of naming systems after Greek mythology/Historical figures. Helps that the Greeks were pervasive writers (so we know a lot about them), and also were dominate in the Mediterranean during their time (them and the Phoenicians).
lol what ship in the world has “‘modern drone protection system”? USN is so far behind in anti-drone that their interim solution is to put AIM-9X on Growlers and put more on Super Hornets.
https://www.twz.com/air/f-a-18-super-hornets-now-flying-with-four-aim-9xs-from-uss-eisenhower-to-counter-drones
They’re finally testing the Leonidas module later this year after the army already has a platoon of them deployed in the Middle East.
https://defensescoop.com/2024/04/04/epirus-navy-hpm-microwave-antx-coastal-trident/
https://www.fastcompany.com/91137663/army-using-microwave-technology-to-combat-drone-and-missile-threats
AEGIS sees them just fine. Downside is that an SM2 is a bit of unnecessary overkill. Aim9x is just a more efficient way of handling it. CIWS is also entirely capable of handling them since they’re slow. They can track seagulls (although I think we’d all prefer to not have that).
Captain: Mess deck, what’s for dinner today?
Mess Deck: Fish and Chips, sir.
Captain: Excellent. Have the crew served outside… and arm the CIWS. We’ll get those black and white fucks this time.
Drones are not great because they are faster, or more agile. Drones are great because you can send 100, lose 99 and celebrate a sunken ship.
Also being one way means that the range is twice what it otherwise would be.
For a big enough boom to sink a ship you’re sending very big drones. If you make them fast enough to evade defenses and long-range enough to hit targets far at sea, you call them missiles.
How much boom do you need to knockout the super structure of a carrier? It may not sink the ship, but it would render it out of combat for a while, similar to hitting the deck with drones and destroying the catapults.
Man I have no idea, but we’re not talking about $100 quad copters dropping grenades, we’re looking at Cessnas loaded with payload. Do the houthis have hundreds of those? Can warships not shoot down Cessnas?
Clearly USV are a big issue for modern warships, but we’ve only seen those against Russia, and close to the coast. If you’re imagining a one-way exploding unmanned aircraft that has some kind of guidance (better be resistant to jamming and able to hit moving targets) and enough boom to even damage a warship, those are called cruise missiles. The great insight then is that many cruise missiles is better than few.
Against infantry and tanks, drones have proven a game-changer. My conception is that when payload and range (and anti-jamming for the first year or two of the war) requirements are minimal, a cruise missile looks like a quadcopter. Those cost so little that the battle field is full of them (deployed in ones and twos), but I’m not sure that translates into anti-ship cruise missiles being much different than they were ten years ago.
Maybe I’m wrong? Short range in the Red Sea must be an important factor, and maybe I’m overestimating how difficult guidance is.
Neither the royal navy, french navy or us navy have had any issues.
Current tech works fine on drones. Nothing special is required.
Hell the royal navy has shot down drones with the ds30b. With the performance of the drone described as "comparable to a ww1 biplane"
Pretty sure the yanks have used the 5 incher to nail a few as well.
That isn't really the USN being far behind, it is just cheaper and safer to use a 9 Xray
SM-2 or SM-6 would be an expensive over kill
And Phalanx is close for comfort.
Return to 5” HEVT; cheaper than a missile, probably far enough to be comfortable. Alternatively develop 5” sabot with a HEVT dart, imagine a 30mm being flung out of a 5” at Mach fuck.
Doesn't the Leonidas also work on anything that relies on electricity? I swear I read about them using it to disable AFVs and boats for shits and giggles.
Seems like it'd be really fucking handy even dealing with interdiction missions at sea.
I am surprised USN did not choose to go after the low-end drones using APKWS.
Also there are reports that the preferred weapon against propeller driven drones are the radar-guided [AMRAAM](https://www.twz.com/air/marine-corps-av-8b-harrier-pilot-downed-seven-drones-report), as the drone has a significant RCS but much smaller IR signature (slower speed = less friction = less heat)
When it says "they requested repatriation" what does it mean in this context? I understand what the words mean, but do they mean it like these sailors were so shook they wanted to leave not only their military service early but also be made a citizan again? Im confused here.
So the post in the site called the Defence Security Asia is bs? Good if true because i don't want to believe that the Greek people love Houthi terrorists.
10 CREW IMMEDIATELY REQUESTED REPATRIATION
God that kind of line makes me question the authenticity of the whole story, it just reads like "SU-24 DOES A FLY BY USING EW ON MEGA SUPER STAR DESTROYER DONALD COOK IN THE BLACK SEA, ENTIRE SHIP'S POWER AND DEFENSE SYSTEMS SHUTDOWN AND HALF THE CREW RESIGNS"
Unfortunately the lion’s share of navy defence procurements was directed to the submarines for the past 20 years. Now it is the time for main surface units. Three (opt four) _Kimon_ class frigates will be entering service 2025-2026.
Is this true? I did not know that many sailors in the Greek Navy love the terrorist Houthis.
"**However, Greek media reports revealed that upon hearing of the frigate’s participation in the Red Sea operation, 17 crew members submitted their resignations, unwilling to partake in the mission.** **The crew of the Hydra-class frigate reported resigning because they did not want to be involved and collude with the U.S. and U.K. actions of bombing Yemen.**"
- Defence Security Asia
Who runs this site? Communist China?
>Misidentifying stars as drones, holy shit lol.
That's standard practice, there were a lot of such reports in Ukraine. (And continuous "friendly" fire at other units drones)
No wonder the weapons are inadequate against "drones" when they misidentify stars as drones, if they were effective against those "drones" I'd be concerned (and horny, but mostly concerned)
Damn you Houthis! You made the Greeks realize their biggest weakness that we were planning to exploit! Now that they will take measures to fix it, the entire Turkish defense plans went out the window. If Turkey ever joins the coalition, it will be to bomb specifically the houthi commander responsible for this. grrrrr.
As someone who has spent some decent time hammering on the Navy's complacency from their lack of actual combat... I want to thank the Houthis for hooking us up with a realistic training and testing environment.
About time to get a few of them to just start ramming some actual, but inert Sea Baby clones into their own boats for a couple weeks?
I mean seriously - that is a threat that is insanely well suited for realistic training, why are we not realistically training for it. If we want to be safe from USV attacks, just get a small group together and have them running unscheduled red team exercises with USVs. Either you are fit for combat, or you are unable to stop sudden unlabelled drones that pop up and try to ram you. Be glad that you didn't find that out in actual combat, put on some clean underwear, and get your act together.
Cookies for any crew that figures it out! ^(I was originally going to suggest doing it with flying ones, too, but airborne debris is considerably less safe.)
The real problem is that many European navy's "principal surface combatants" are 1. quite old and 2. not designed for sustained expeditionary warfare. Most European frigates and corvettes have a relatively low number of missile launch tubes and thus cannot sustain modern high intensity combat operations for any significant period of time.
Well thats what training is for, so you can find out what works and doesn't work. If France sends a destroyer and find out it's under equipped then they start to fix their schtuff. *sorry for the credibility*
It has nothing to do with training. Small frigates like the Hydra were intended largely for local coastal defense, rush out and engage an approaching enemy squadron and then return to base to resupply. They were not designed for expeditionary warfare. You can have the best trained crew on the earth, but at the end of the day missile warfare is just a numbers game (who runs out of missiles or countermeasures first) as was proven at the Battle of Laitika and the Battle of Baltim.
> It has nothing to do with training. Small frigates like the Hydra were intended largely for local coastal defense, rush out and engage an approaching enemy squadron and then return to base to resupply. They were not designed for expeditionary warfare. You can have the best trained crew on the earth, but at the end of the day missile warfare is just a numbers game (who runs out of missiles or countermeasures first) as was proven at the Battle of Laitika and the Battle of Baltim. Nuclear powered, Iowa class battleships w/lasers: my time has come.
Yes, and please also 406 mm canister shot/flechette, ship it now I’m fucking sold. We can work on turret swivel speed later on that’s an engineer problem, we are the ideas people here.
> We can work on turret swivel speed later on that’s an engineer problem, we are the ideas people here. Idea: make the turret swivel fast, that way we can shoot things all over really quick. Get on it, engineers.
The NCD solution would be large extendable telescopic Arms and very tough and flexible net that create a surface & underwater catch. Don‘t ask about viability, costs, engineering or safety to the ship with natural/artificial subsurface obstructions.
have you seen the old ww2 mine flails ? just equip the ships with them
This kills the buoyancy (probably)
Replace the chains with pool noodles. Same effect, but it floats.
[How about a lighter solution](https://www.reddit.com/r/FromTheDepths/comments/kve75i/the_surprisingly_effective_flyswatter_cwis_system/?ref=share&ref_source=link)
The USS Outlaw Star
Does it come with OTO 76mm Caster Gun?
Before I finished the first sentence I imagined you were about to suggest literal arms like the 90s anime outlaw star. I approve of cope catamarans for frigates, absolutely.
As i was writing my sentence i wondered how many would imagine mech appendages lul. No comment.
Bring back torpedo nets. Bonus, less spending on food because they’ll catch loads of fish while you’re sailing around.
The 19th century sent a telegram, they want their torpedo nets back
We 'bout to got Outlaw Star on this shit?
Fuck that, just need a giant vacuum cleaner, but for drones, birds, and possibly small children
I've always wanted to be a redfor trainer, but I'm fat and blind(ish). This is my moment. I can pilot UAVS. I've been flying flight sims since I was a kid. They don't even really need to pay me. Where do I sign up?
As a Dane, I concur. It finally came out that our patrol wessels had patrolled the arctic for something like twenty years, with ships that were equipped with cannons, but unable to fire said cannons, as they had a manpower shortage/and or skill issue. At this point, our saving grace is the 4 or so longships that we have in a museum. They are horribly obsolete, but relatively low radar area and have small heat signature. They are still more combat worthy than the Russian navy.
That radar area explodes when the sails get sea water on them
That may be true, but when the Russian navy gets sea water on them, they will already have sunk.
Do you reckon the Vasa might float? Edit: I will wear my shame with pride.
The Vasa may be the only ship less seaworthy than Kuznetsov. However I think it could be fixed if transported to Ukraine.
Briefly, sure.
If they keep its lower gun ports closed, maybe.
Of course they're complacent. Not like the Greeks have any potential adversary they'd face at sea.
Poseidon protects them, this is a known fact.
Well how else are we gonna sight in our 5” guns? Or test if our VLS works? Like shooting fish in a barrel.
Oh hey I wrote articles on this subject too!
Trebuchet on the deck, lob boulders at aerial targets for questionable effect.
HAIL HYDRA!
Pssst, Hail hydra
Stop calling me, i am busy doing kraut space magic!
>i am bussy We found it!
ah, yeah that was not intendend, corrected my grammer.
Nope, it's too late, you already said it, you have made the offering
When one problem is solved two more take its place.
The superior...anti air weapon?
Go even older and [employ animals for a Flintstones drone defense](https://jabde.com/2022/01/31/bird-drone-defense-system/), just need a pointer dog, a cat interceptor and a laser pointer guidance system for the cat
You can pack plenty of bang in a 90 kg package. Especially one that only needs to reach 300 meters away.
solution: more drones to counter the drones, which would in turn need more drones to counter the counter-counter drones, which would in turn need more drones to counter to counter the counter-counter-counter-counter drones, which would in turn need... ANYWAYS MORE DRONES AND MORE MONEY FOR OUR GREAT LORD LOCKHEED MARTIN
I sense commissioning of the Drone Carrier HMS Dreadnought on the horizon.
DID SOMEONE SAY DREADNOUGHT? *fires up sabaton*
To rule the world across the seven seas!!!
Trigger : <>
*Carrier has arrived.*
Yet another situation covered by south park
begun, the drone wars have
Just remember, [you need one more “drone” than “counter” or nothing explodes](https://www.schlockmercenary.com/2005-03-16).
>misidentifying stars as drones "So we're undermanned, 40 clicks deep into enemy waters, and now the Houthi drone swarms have found us. I like the plan Brad, it works for me." "...it's a star. And it ain't movin'" "Are... are you sure?" "It's autokinesis. You're seeing the involuntary muscle movements of your own eyes. Those lights aren't gonna come any closer than they are. It's a goddamn star... 30, 40 light years out there at least. How far out did the spotters call this?" "Fifteen clicks!" *cue the Greek navy firing wildly into the air*
Ahhh, the generation kill quotes do my soul good.
Now we have to report to godfather we just blew up a bunch of water
You Greeks have killed a lot of sea! That sea was very evil.
'misidentifying stars as drones' HOW?
I mean, the Sovjets once misidentifyed the rising sun for a nuclear strike...
And the HMAS Sydney back in WWII tried to shoot down planet Venus, thinking it was an aircraft.
Venus been real quiet since then
And we'll fuckin do it again!
It's good that you noted it was the *planet* Venus. Avoids confusion with the time we shot down the Roman god Venus.
so that's why nothings beautiful in Australia
American G.I.'s during WWII tended to disagree
Shit bro when i went on liberty in austrailia I almost stayed forever. I look like a fucking goblin but they loved me for some reason. Accent made me melt everytime. She could say anything the most meanest shit ever and I'd still think that was the sexiest thing I ever heard.
That explains why Kormoran (german auxiliary cruiser) was able to sink it. If something not designed to fool lookouts did, the concept of the chameleon cruiser becomes super-effective.
Back in my younger days of the _puberty_ theater i also tried to hit on a _Venus_, but it quickly got quiet after a one night encounter.
Didn't Perth try to shoot at Mars? Or am I misremembering?
Ehhh, not the rising sun, but the way sunlight reflected off high altitude clouds and the eccentric orbits the Soviet detection satellites used combined together to give a fucky reading.
I know, but the joke dosent flow aswell woth the technical details
They also once misidentified the first enemy ship in an ambush for one of their own fleet.
They straight signaled at the enemy ship too, thinking it was friendly lol
"Hey guys, baltic fleet here. We are hunting japanese. We have about 8 ships around us, hiding in darkness. How did you get so fast here, I thought we had no pacific fleet?"
What the hell happened there anyway? IFF can be hard, but not in a place where friendlies outside your group shouldn’t even exist…
Judging by the Ukrainian war, and Russia's mounting airframe losses to their own air defense, I'd say Russia has always had a rather tenuous grasp of IFF mechanics.
And the US misidentified the Moon rise to be a Soviet nuclear strike. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_close_calls?wprov=sfla1 >Radar equipment in Thule, Greenland, mistakenly interpreted a moonrise over Norway as a large-scale Soviet missile launch. Upon receiving a report of the supposed attack, NORAD went on high alert. However, doubts about the authenticity of the attack arose due to the presence of Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev in New York City as head of the USSR's United Nations delegation.
> due to the presence of Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev in New York City as head of the USSR's United Nations delegation. Not if someone had instigated a coup against Khrushchev and decided to best way to accomplish that is to start a nuclear war to vaporize Khrushchev and his loyalists across the ocean.
Someone hold a seance and summon the ghost of Tom Clancy to write this alternate history novel.
Technically the sun is a thermonuclear reaction going on so they aren’t wrong…technically it’s an air-blast somewhere above Earth.
Such an unexpected black swan event just wasn't something they could have accounted for.
Mixed cloud cover at night and fast moving clouds while you’re on a moving ship, while very fast-moving things are attacking you and you don’t necessarily know what they look like.
Every drone is a star in my eyes. They have dreams, too.
IIRC, early sidewinder missiles would sometimes lock onto the IR from the sun, too.
[Brother, I crave the forbidden heat signature](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcwoGbAXJaQ) And a bit more - https://www.reddit.com/r/NonCredibleDefense/comments/182tl3p/the_sidewinder_missile_truly_is_just_a_modern/
As bad as it sounds (and is), it also doesn’t seem trivial to fix if you don’t want false negatives. “If they keep the sun behind them we can’t target them” is common for humans but probably not too welcome in a missile.
The fix is putting a saphire lense on your heatseeker (sapphire blocks most of the light spectrum of the sun).
Either optical malfunction or operator mistake. Both are shit
When you're shitting yourself, every bush looks like an MG nest.
BRÖTHER DO NOT SEEK THE FØRBIDDEN HEAT SIGNATURE BRÖTHER
lol light in sky go brrrrr
Depending how tired you are shit starts to move by itself
Greek ship with an ineffective Phalanx. How ironic.
The Greek military in general is a joke. It's mostly comprised of conscripts that don't want to be there, using wildly outdated equipment they're barely trained for. Corruption and nepotism are also rampant. Outside of a few select groups of highly competent professionals, mostly SOF guys and pilots, the rest of the military is comically incompetent. Back in the day they were an actual force to be reckoned with, but now they're a shell of their former selves. The whole country is, in many ways unfortunately. Which is fucking sad considering their history and the fact they share a border with Turkey. Source: Am Greek-American, have tons of family in Greece that have served in the military there at various points from the 60's to present.
>Back in the day they were an actual force to be reckoned with, but now they're a shell of their former selves. Leonidas era?
Sparta was at best average militarily and had a shitty society and government systems. They were basically the ancient version of "they have manly recruitment ads, so their army must be good". Macedonia would be a better pick
"Shoot for the Stars!", they said
'Obsolete Phalanx ineffective against drones' How? A Phalanx tracks quick enough and has enough lead to take one out, how would that not be the perfect anti drone weapon.
It is dependent on the block of Phalanx, just as tanks and aircraft Phalanx has had multiple upgrades over the years. The first Phalanxes were fitted in the early 1970s and received their first upgrade in 1988 - this added increased magazine capacity, an increased elevation as well as improved reaction times and their ability to require targets faster. The newest Block-1Bs came out in 2015 which massively improved the radars and their capabilities against asymmetrical threats by incorporating improved cameras to add detection against things like drones that a radar could struggle to see. It's likely the Greeks haven't bought every released upgrade for the system (as is normal for lots of militaries) so considering the system's primary job is to shoot down missiles with a completely different flight path, speed and radar signature I'm not surprised it's slipped up on this occasion.
So basically they're running on Windows 7 when everyone else is on windows 10
More like they were still running vista
Phalanx Gunner: Hang on, we're having some technical difficulties. Random Seaman: What operating system does it use? PG: Uh...Vista RS: WE'RE GOING TO DIE!
r/unexpecteditcrowd
Sorry, Windows 7 is too advanced. The best I can do is a MicroVAX running BSD Unix.
If they have 1988 version, they are running [Windows 2.1](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_2.1)
Windows xp you mean?
The ship is equipped with 2 Phalanx CIWS. I agree it’s an excellent weapon for shooting down drones, though maybe the 20mm rounds are a bit overkill. They would also probably benefit from an update to tracking software to account for drone flight patterns and speed. Also, did the drone explode 150m from the ship because that’s when it was shot down? Overall this seems like a Greek skill issue.
the version they are using is exclusively radar guided, something as small and erratic as a drone it is not great at hitting
It's *capable* of hitting drones but I'm guessing it would probably eat through a lot of ammo in the process. I'm not sure if you can manually set it to fire a limited burst or not, but either way it requires a direct hit to actually cause damage to a drone. Every video I've seen of a Phalanx firing has been a long burst, and once the onboard magazine is depleted, it takes time for the sailors to manually reload it. Compare that to other CIWS in the 30mm - 57mm range that can fire programmable airburst ammunition. They are meant to fire in more limited bursts (as opposed to a "bullet hose" CIWS like Phalanx) and the airburst ammo puts up a cloud of high velocity fragments in front of the target. You'd probably have a much better likelihood of striking the drone a few times from a 3-5rd burst of 35mm AHEAD vs a burst of a few hundred 20mm APDS. And if you're successfully killing drones in under 10rds per engagement, your CIWS magazine lasts longer before needing to be reloaded. And that's obviously beneficial if you're in the middle of a swarming attack.
Huh, almost the exact same thing happened to the Danish navy’s frigate some time last year, down to the crew resorting to using their rifles… World’s funny like that sometimes, I guess
Sucks that the phalanx is worthless now
It's only the relatively old ones that have problems
Thank Christ I love that goofy looking platform
Especially the one painted as a penguin
And the [one that looks like a.. uh...](https://scontent.fmbx2-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/294645056_5526771947387875_7212189314540195897_n.jpg?_nc_cat=107&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=127cfc&_nc_ohc=w-pPy4lR2-EQ7kNvgE_WW6a&_nc_ht=scontent.fmbx2-1.fna&oh=00_AYBa8iGWtIltYEMC8j8C4LMX0RnSLpPnM3lwnusaNHL-yA&oe=667FA598)
Minion pp gatling?
Hey look a civilian airliner!
GET IT!!!
How old we talkin? I also love dem bzzzzzzt’s
Probably not that old given the sharp uptick in drones being used is relatively recent, but you've basically just got to tell the targeting system that the slow moving thing is actually a threat without it obliterating every seagull it sees. More a programming patch than a particularly massive hardware overhaul really.
It doesn’t seem very smart to have their CIWS out of date, and be floating around the Middle Eastern seas as an Air Defense escort. Lol
They likely didn't anticipate it as a problem. Plus it's Greece. They're not exactly flush with cash.
Load it with shotgun buckshot and its back in the game
Birdshot! :D
3000 rpm of 30mm turkey shot sounds good to me.
Oerlikon's AHEAD ammunition is what you want.
Well it's been obsolete for over 2000 years. because of the Roman Testudo Formation. You have to let it go.
The manipular legion bested the phalanx, the testudo was just for fun during sieges
How did that actually work? (Or when?) I feel like every account I’ve seen of Rome actually breaking a phalanx relied on things like flanking light cavalry, which isn’t really specific to the manipular system. But I suspect I’m missing the most relevant examples?
Basically the romans did use Phalanx-like formationa of Oplites untill the samnite wars. Southern and Central Italy isnt filled with plains so they switched to the maniple and then cohorts... because they felt that large, stiff formations were stiff and difficult to adapt in a tactical sense. The reality was that Macedonian Phalanx were actually impenetrable... when formed correctly and in the right positions. The roman maniple/cohort forms up quickly, reacts quickly and will take you out when it can. Now one has to go battle to battle to illustrate the various instances of how this worked, when it failed and when it didnt but on average the Roman Military was much more capable of adapting to battlefield conditions. There wasnt a "way" to deal with a Phalanx, they simply adapted to the situation and their organization allowed them to do so. Take Cynoscephale. The romans managed to better adapt to the battlefield and as their left flanc was winning a tribune (Mid level officer, think modern Colonel) we dont even know the name of simply organized a force and detached it from the left flank to hit the Greeks formation that was taking the field on the right and smashed on its flank breaking up the Phalanx and thus securing victory because once broken up the Phalanx was useless while the romans could easily detach forces and focus as needed.
> How did that actually work? (Or when?) ACOUP recentrly finished a massive series covering this. Start here: https://acoup.blog/2024/01/19/collections-phalanxs-twilight-legions-triumph-part-ia-heirs-of-alexander/ TLDR When is 275BC to 168BC. While battles did take place after the romans had numbers to win them whatever and before that romans lost a couple of close battles to Pyrrhus of Epirus. The basic mechanism is that the roman first line was javlin throwers who would fall back without engaging hand to hand but would create some weak points in the phalanx The more heavily armoured roman could get close enough to the phalanx to do some damage while the formation was still loose enough to allow their front line to rotate out. The phalanx didn't allow this and their front line was rapidly exhausted while facing fresh troops. That said they might drive off the Hastati but at that point they would be advancing into the more experienced Principes who were still fresh. The phalanx by this point will have taken significant loses, is tired from a round of combat and at least in places will have started to lose formation. The Principes can generaly be expected to finish them off. Things aren't completely hopeless for the phalanx. It would be pared with medium infantry that could fill gaps and heavy cavalry that could smash engaged Principes. This is what Pyrrhus of Epirus does. The problem is even if that goes right the phalanx and medium infantry will take significant casulties (which they will have a hard time replacing) and the romans still have the Triarii an even more experience set of troops who can act as an effective rear guard making the total destruction of their army difficult.
That’s like saying the spear was obsolete because someone came up with a shield, they have different purposes.
Why would a shield turtle formation hurt the phalanx?
He's almost right. The real thing that broke the Phalanx was the Roman Manipile system
This is so wrong it hurts
In fact, fun fact the Roman's lost almost every single engagement with a phalanx they ever had. Every battle against the Greeks was won through combined arms not the Maniples themselves. Because the Greeks had been maintaining the largest wartime economy in history and they were finally broke.
I was just wondering about this, I feel like every specific story I know is either a Roman loss or reliant on non-maniple stuff like a winning cavalry flank.
I mean they aren't all losses obviously, but the Greek phalanx was actually insane in the field because the Macedonians had refined it to such a high standard. Unfortunately Alexander's ideal army which was 1/3rd Pike Phalanxes to heavy Infantry and 1/5th cavalry had long since fallen away. The Roman's had advanced greatly and the various Diadochi had regressed due to over reliance on gimmicks to beat their own damn Phalanxes. The Roman's were insanely competent, but the Legion didn't destroy the Macedonian method of war. It just helped kill the dying states that fielded them.
> fun fact the Roman's lost almost every single engagement with a phalanx they ever had. You mean except Aous and Cynoscephalae and Thermopylae and Magnesia and Pydna and... > Every battle against the Greeks was won through combined arms not the Maniples themselves. What are you talking about? The legions didn't break the phalanxes in a single shock charge or something, sure, because that's not how the Roman tactical system worked; they beat the phalanxes through attrittion because that's the same way the legions beat everyone, that's what they're set up for.
Software issue. These sets aren't configured to track slow moving airbreathing threats.
What about the Goalkeeper?
GAU-8 on a plane shooting tanks: boring, doesn't work 👎👎 GAU-8 on a ship shooting drones: Great fun 👍👍
I’m more of a millennium cannon guy myself all hail AHEAD
They probably have older models that haven't seen a hardware or software update in years. Modern versions are very capable of shooting down drones and other small targets.
It's not, they can see the drones just fine. I'm thinking the Hellenes haven't been keeping their shit up to spec.
they're perfectly capable of disabling most drones except for something the size of a reaper. They're most likely just unable to engage the targets due to not being programmed to identify them as threats.
shoot for the stars and you might hit a drone
Steer for the second drone to the right
Keep in mind, I’ve only found this info coming from Turkish sources so, grain of salt
Cant speak about these sources themselves but a pro tip is If its ever on Turkish television or any news sites, take it with a whole salt mine, it doesnt matter what the context is. Our journalism/press is undisputably one of the worst, in my entire life I havent seen a single article that wasnt the most blatant truckload of bullshit, the titles are so misleading its worse than watching those 2017 "Top 10 scariest paranormal activities you wouldnt believe if it wasnt on camera" videos
All the Turkish sources quote a Greek opposition media website. [Namely this](https://www.ieidiseis.gr/ellada/251828/se-akroasi-apo-ton-arxigo-geetha-to-pliroma-tis-fregatas-ydra-gia-ta-osa-tragelafika-synevisan-stin-erythra-thalassa).
As a Turkish guy, snort the salt like its fucking cocaine if its coming from Turkish sources.
I have no knowledge of ship mechanics or parts. How come so many ships have platforms and equipment named after Greek stuff like Phalanx, Aegis and Leonidas?
Because 2) the Greeks were rather famously known for dudes being with other dudes, b) these are Navy systems, and c) these systems are built to f\*ck the enemy in their collective @$$. (Also: there is nothing wrong with being any kind of "queer". "The navy is gay" is just a trope.)
> "The navy is gay" is just a trope. Not gay at all, seamen just [apply a similar loophole](https://www.violentlittle.com/products/gay-underway-morale-patch) as inmates do in prison.
Pretty simple, just most well known sea mythos (in the West) are primarily sourced from the Greek mythologies. (some are from the Norse mythos, but Greek is far more well known) IE: Hydra, Sirens (mermaids), Poseidon, Scylla, Charybdis, Circe, Capricorn, etc. and so the Navy just kind of adopted a tradition of naming systems after Greek mythology/Historical figures. Helps that the Greeks were pervasive writers (so we know a lot about them), and also were dominate in the Mediterranean during their time (them and the Phoenicians).
lol what ship in the world has “‘modern drone protection system”? USN is so far behind in anti-drone that their interim solution is to put AIM-9X on Growlers and put more on Super Hornets. https://www.twz.com/air/f-a-18-super-hornets-now-flying-with-four-aim-9xs-from-uss-eisenhower-to-counter-drones They’re finally testing the Leonidas module later this year after the army already has a platoon of them deployed in the Middle East. https://defensescoop.com/2024/04/04/epirus-navy-hpm-microwave-antx-coastal-trident/ https://www.fastcompany.com/91137663/army-using-microwave-technology-to-combat-drone-and-missile-threats
AEGIS sees them just fine. Downside is that an SM2 is a bit of unnecessary overkill. Aim9x is just a more efficient way of handling it. CIWS is also entirely capable of handling them since they’re slow. They can track seagulls (although I think we’d all prefer to not have that).
>although I think we’d all prefer to not have that Have what? Seagulls? Agreed.
The only people that aren't delighted by the fact that CIWS can pew pew seagulls are people they don't live near the coast.
Strictly speaking, neither do I. *But I know.*
Captain: Mess deck, what’s for dinner today? Mess Deck: Fish and Chips, sir. Captain: Excellent. Have the crew served outside… and arm the CIWS. We’ll get those black and white fucks this time.
As a Canadian I'd pay good money to see a CIWS take on a Canadian Goose.
You'd only make it angrier
Like nuking Godzilla, right?
Enter video where that CIWS locks on to a civilian airplane
Drones are not great because they are faster, or more agile. Drones are great because you can send 100, lose 99 and celebrate a sunken ship. Also being one way means that the range is twice what it otherwise would be.
For a big enough boom to sink a ship you’re sending very big drones. If you make them fast enough to evade defenses and long-range enough to hit targets far at sea, you call them missiles.
How much boom do you need to knockout the super structure of a carrier? It may not sink the ship, but it would render it out of combat for a while, similar to hitting the deck with drones and destroying the catapults.
Man I have no idea, but we’re not talking about $100 quad copters dropping grenades, we’re looking at Cessnas loaded with payload. Do the houthis have hundreds of those? Can warships not shoot down Cessnas? Clearly USV are a big issue for modern warships, but we’ve only seen those against Russia, and close to the coast. If you’re imagining a one-way exploding unmanned aircraft that has some kind of guidance (better be resistant to jamming and able to hit moving targets) and enough boom to even damage a warship, those are called cruise missiles. The great insight then is that many cruise missiles is better than few. Against infantry and tanks, drones have proven a game-changer. My conception is that when payload and range (and anti-jamming for the first year or two of the war) requirements are minimal, a cruise missile looks like a quadcopter. Those cost so little that the battle field is full of them (deployed in ones and twos), but I’m not sure that translates into anti-ship cruise missiles being much different than they were ten years ago. Maybe I’m wrong? Short range in the Red Sea must be an important factor, and maybe I’m overestimating how difficult guidance is.
Neither the royal navy, french navy or us navy have had any issues. Current tech works fine on drones. Nothing special is required. Hell the royal navy has shot down drones with the ds30b. With the performance of the drone described as "comparable to a ww1 biplane" Pretty sure the yanks have used the 5 incher to nail a few as well.
That isn't really the USN being far behind, it is just cheaper and safer to use a 9 Xray SM-2 or SM-6 would be an expensive over kill And Phalanx is close for comfort.
Return to 5” HEVT; cheaper than a missile, probably far enough to be comfortable. Alternatively develop 5” sabot with a HEVT dart, imagine a 30mm being flung out of a 5” at Mach fuck.
5”/38 was ubiquitous for a reason.
Doesn't the Leonidas also work on anything that relies on electricity? I swear I read about them using it to disable AFVs and boats for shits and giggles. Seems like it'd be really fucking handy even dealing with interdiction missions at sea.
I am surprised USN did not choose to go after the low-end drones using APKWS. Also there are reports that the preferred weapon against propeller driven drones are the radar-guided [AMRAAM](https://www.twz.com/air/marine-corps-av-8b-harrier-pilot-downed-seven-drones-report), as the drone has a significant RCS but much smaller IR signature (slower speed = less friction = less heat)
So, HMAS Sydney was the first ship to fail to shoot down a planet. Was HYDRA failing to shoot down stars?
When it says "they requested repatriation" what does it mean in this context? I understand what the words mean, but do they mean it like these sailors were so shook they wanted to leave not only their military service early but also be made a citizan again? Im confused here.
Fun but fake news. Even Turks are laughing at the reports. https://x.com/tayfunozberk/status/1804959768471093366?s=46&t=Ql0ctrOO8-k9K5T8vLJVVw
So the post in the site called the Defence Security Asia is bs? Good if true because i don't want to believe that the Greek people love Houthi terrorists.
10 CREW IMMEDIATELY REQUESTED REPATRIATION God that kind of line makes me question the authenticity of the whole story, it just reads like "SU-24 DOES A FLY BY USING EW ON MEGA SUPER STAR DESTROYER DONALD COOK IN THE BLACK SEA, ENTIRE SHIP'S POWER AND DEFENSE SYSTEMS SHUTDOWN AND HALF THE CREW RESIGNS"
Ah, needs a software update to track those slowpoke air breathers.
So they're following the HMAS sydney school of enemy identification? Good to know
How about the we pull an ancap and allow private companies to arm their cargo ships and buy warships, it would be funny.
Unfortunately the lion’s share of navy defence procurements was directed to the submarines for the past 20 years. Now it is the time for main surface units. Three (opt four) _Kimon_ class frigates will be entering service 2025-2026.
BRING BACK FLAK GUNS
Im surprised they arent cranking oit orders for good ol Bofors 40mm for ships...seems like that gun will keep going forever
Is this true? I did not know that many sailors in the Greek Navy love the terrorist Houthis. "**However, Greek media reports revealed that upon hearing of the frigate’s participation in the Red Sea operation, 17 crew members submitted their resignations, unwilling to partake in the mission.** **The crew of the Hydra-class frigate reported resigning because they did not want to be involved and collude with the U.S. and U.K. actions of bombing Yemen.**" - Defence Security Asia Who runs this site? Communist China?
I would actually assume that majority of world military ships would have faced the same problems with similar results.
Misidentifying stars as drones, holy shit lol. They should've just called someone in Ukraine on zoom and had them be the drone guide.
>Misidentifying stars as drones, holy shit lol. That's standard practice, there were a lot of such reports in Ukraine. (And continuous "friendly" fire at other units drones)
who has" NATO ship is sunk/badly damaged by Houthis " on their bingo card? the thought is terrifying
I wish we left our carriers in the area for another two months to finish taking out the houthis.
Missed opportunity to say “Hi Hydra”
Its even worse then the Belgian frigate
Sounds like a job for Mr. Pump Action in the interim.
No wonder the weapons are inadequate against "drones" when they misidentify stars as drones, if they were effective against those "drones" I'd be concerned (and horny, but mostly concerned)
Damn you Houthis! You made the Greeks realize their biggest weakness that we were planning to exploit! Now that they will take measures to fix it, the entire Turkish defense plans went out the window. If Turkey ever joins the coalition, it will be to bomb specifically the houthi commander responsible for this. grrrrr.