This seems absurd. I see no reason in the post USS Cole era, we would ever allow another military aircraft this close to one of our vessels. Shoot the Fucker down, ask no questions. There is no potential upside to allowing this to occur. Thoughts from people smarter than me are appreciated.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/ira...d-for-unsafe-conduct

Hmmm...

Just read that the effective firing range of a Phalanx CIWS is about 1500 meters

How about this...at 3000 meters from the ship, you get a warning burst. At 1500 you get lit up.

I'm not gonna say too much, I could talk about it at length, but let me just say, from someone who does this for a living, the "shoot em down" response is silly.

Don't let FOX NEWS make a daily occurrence into a headline.

It's standard practice.

let's see. Maybe because the current regime lacks the spinal fortitude?

should have Marine vehicles on deck - then they can toggle off the proverbial "shot across their bow" (or nose) and get the message across to them.



When the IOWA was in the Straits of Hormuz, we had M60, M2 and Mk19 positions sandbagged in along the deck. Then could select up to CIWS, 5" 38, or 16" 50. But a line of tracers would do the trick for a helo...

In that locale, you basically gotta take some rounds before the ROE allow you to release batteries.

Fly-bys happen like that all the time by our enemies.

The Russians did it to US ships in the Black Sea…they still do it.

Nothing new. They are trying to provoke a response. If the US absorbs some rounds, then all bets are off. But if we splash one before they shoot-then we are the bad guys and it plays into their politics

If incidents like this have indeed become 'daily occurrences', perhaps the headline should question why such incidents have been allowed to become daily occurrences and regarded as standard practice.

Very curious, as such a close fly-by would not have been allowed with a carrier strike group.

The Navy (and this admin) puts its ship captains in no-win situations. If they shot down this helo, the Group Commander and Captain would have been courtmartialed and blamed for causing an international incident. If they let it go and the helo intentionally crashes into, say all those nicely parked Osprey's, again, they'd get courtmartialed for negligence and not taking all necessary precautions to protect the ship & crew.

SO, they're left with just watching and hoping that the Iranian's don't do anything stupid.

They know we won’t do shit.

Look back at all the USNavy guys at gunpoint from a few years ago in the bottom of a Iranian boat.

Iran is unafraid and weeks away from a nuclear weapon.

I guess those ships don't fly their own planes or to protect their air space like aircraft carriers do.

quote:

Originally posted by Rey HRH:
I guess those ships don't fly their own planes or to protect their air space like aircraft carriers do.

I don't think LHD's typically fly FONOP or CAP flights.

This is NOT an issue of the capabilities of the weapons systems. This is an RoE issue.

No one seems to want a shooting war in the gulf. If we wanted one we could easily start it. Splashing that helo might do the trick.

quote:

Originally posted by Jimbo Jones:
Hmmm...

Just read that the effective firing range of a Phalanx CIWS is about 1500 meters

How about this...at 3000 meters from the ship, you get a warning burst. At 1500 you get lit up.

quote:

Originally posted by MikeinNC:
Fly-bys happen like that all the time by

everyone, since forever.









Sometimes it goes terribly wrong.

Its a game played out by both sides.
We do the same things to them.

I remember being close enough to a soviet AGI off the east coast that I could have almost pissed on it from the flight deck of an FFG. We harassed them for hours.

quote:

Originally posted by SpinZone:
Its a game played out by both sides.
We do the same things to them.

I remember being close enough to a soviet AGI off the east coast that I could have almost pissed on it from the flight deck of an FFG. We harassed them for hours.

Yep. Somewhere is a pic of sailors mooning a soviet ship.

When I was Navy off Vietnam we had several incidents. we sailed very close to Hainan Island, PRC. Every now and again we got buzzed. Twice by our own F-15s(?) and once by the PRC. They all pulled the same trick. Each event came from aft at incredibly low height, like just off the deck. You could look over the side and the plane was below you. We had a lot of freeboard. This was an ammunition ship, an AE of Suribachi class.

Believe me, it sounded like hell had opened up. Being we carried an enormous amount of ordinance, everyone thought we were about to explode. And while we were all very relieved it was nothing more than jackass stick jockeys having fun, there were no good words spoken of them.

As I recall, nothing ever happened about any of it. I do think the command was on the phone to the nearest carrier about the PRC but I don't recall anybody coming to take a look though there might have been a fly-over to let them know we had help. We carried 2 mounts of old WW2 twin 40mm AA, useless in the modern-day. Even if they worked reliably which they did not.

The Cap did get "even" by showing off the guns to visitors in Hong Kong harbor. He traversed them pointing at Mainland China, a very forbidden act. No one noticed and that was that.

You guys are used to the old Navy.

This is the new "built back better" Navy.

Good point.

How close does an non-friendly aircraft have to be before its seen as a threat?

quote:

Originally posted by BBMW:
This is NOT an issue of the capabilities of the weapons systems. This is an RoE issue.

No one seems to want a shooting war in the gulf. If we wanted one we could easily start it. Splashing that helo might do the trick.

quote:

Originally posted by Jimbo Jones:
Hmmm...

Just read that the effective firing range of a Phalanx CIWS is about 1500 meters

How about this...at 3000 meters from the ship, you get a warning burst. At 1500 you get lit up.

quote:

Originally posted by Jimbo Jones:
Good point.

How close does an non-friendly aircraft have to be before its seen as a threat?

Its all about context, if the inbound aircraft is on an aggressive course and all sensors & intelligence is pointing out that they've got some bad intentions or, the battle group has something going on that they don't want to be seen, then it'll get intercepted and highly encouraged to change course.

Soviet aircraft buzzing our carrier groups happened however, they also communicated and made an effort to at the very least adhere to some accepted 'ground rules'. These Iranian flights are not your local Navy taking a joy-ride but, they're IRGC: basically the SS of Iran. They're the die-hards, true-believers, Allah's gift to humanity, etc....suicide bombings and reckless intimidation displays are their MO.

Climate change is a bigger threat to the US Navy than Iranian aircraft.

quote:

Originally posted by SpinZone:
Its a game played out by both sides.
We do the same things to them.

Yep. Everybody rattles the sabers.